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.
(This above post contains: Sarcasm, nuts and flu capsules.)
But we can veto it... wait.
Since when does the voice of one member of an opposition party suddenly become the voice of the whole of Germany?
Yes there are different ideologies, but claiming and comparing the Germany of today with Hitler's Germany of 1930/40's is hardly rational. Just look at the Tory party conference. Theresa May says all sorts of things. None of it really actually happens....
"Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. " - V
I've just supported the Permanent European Union Citizenship initiative. Please do the same and spread the word!
"It's not a problem if you don't look up." - Dakka's approach to politics
(This above post contains: Sarcasm, nuts and flu capsules.)
But we can veto it... wait.
Since when does the voice of one member of an opposition party suddenly become the voice of the whole of Germany?
Yes there are different ideologies, but claiming and comparing the Germany of today with Hitler's Germany of 1930/40's is hardly rational. Just look at the Tory party conference. Theresa May says all sorts of things. None of it really actually happens....
Did you not read the part where I said my post was sarcastic?
But hey, Hitler was the leader of an opposition party at one point.
Sarcasm aside, there are plenty of people in the higher up places of the EU that have this view he's just come out and said it. As Juncker once said, the EU does something, if no one kicks up a fuss it carries on until there is no turning back.
DS:90-S+G+++M++B-IPw40k03+D+A++/fWD-R++T(T)DM+ Warmachine MKIII record 39W/0D/6L
welshhoppo wrote: Sarcasm aside, there are plenty of people in the higher up places of the EU that have this view he's just come out and said it. As Juncker once said, the EU does something, if no one kicks up a fuss it carries on until there is no turning back.
And if someone does say no they just do it anyway. He said himself, "“If it's a Yes, we will say 'on we go', and if it's a No we will say 'we continue’".
It's kind of like the attempt at an EU army. They start setting it up whilst continuing to deny that they're doing it, until one day it's all in place and they just do it. And then after it's done if anyone objects they just shrug their shoulders and say 'it's too late now'.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/12/07 19:05:42
Sarcasm aside, there are plenty of people in the higher up places of the EU that have this view he's just come out and said it. As Juncker once said, the EU does something, if no one kicks up a fuss it carries on until there is no turning back.
I think that is how all politics works really not just for the EU.
"Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. " - V
I've just supported the Permanent European Union Citizenship initiative. Please do the same and spread the word!
"It's not a problem if you don't look up." - Dakka's approach to politics
China or Saudi Arabia aren't trying to use their status as a democracy to bolster the legitimacy. of their actions, Israel is
Truthfully? I think the people who make up Israel stopped giving a flying feth about what the rest of the world thought back in 1940.
And with good reason. Hitler had his way with them, the Russians and Poles kept killing them even when they tried to go home, the Brits and French refused to take them, but put into new camps in Cyprus when they tried to get to Palestine. Then they were invaded multiple times over, and every time they won, their foreign opposition demanded that they just forgive and forget, and return their state to existing along lines arbitrarily drawn on a map prior to their country existing.
Their human rights abuses and blatant racism towards Palestinians are well documented, and I in no way endorse such actions. I do however, have complete sympathy for their annexation of certain areas like the Golan Heights. Why? Because if you go to war with a nation with the intent of committing genocide not once, but four times, and that nation then kicks your arse? You've little grounds for complaint when they slice off a small area of your adjoining territory to use as a buffer zone in case you do it again. Compared to what was agreed at the Treaty of Versailles, or indeed, most peace treaties signed in the last hundred years, losing control of the Golan Heights is small potatoes.
When the protestors keep bringing up issues like that as evidence of Israel's perfidy amongst the genuine issues though, it dilutes the message and just makes them go, 'Well you clearly are either an idiot or have it in for us too. Either way, we shall ignore you'.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/12/07 20:14:49
That may be, but the wider issue is that it makes zero sense for a super power like the USA to invest so much time and money into propping up Israel...whilst gaining nothing in return, but trouble...
The more I read about the Founding Fathers, the more I respect their wisdom. Were they perfect? Of course not, especially the slave owners amongst them who saw no contradiction in advocating life liberty pursuit of happiness etc etc whilst keeping slaves.
None the less, their advice was ignored, to the detriment of the USA IMO.
They warned about the dangers of executive over reach. They warned about the dangers of political parties, and above all, they warned about the danger of foreign entanglements...
As for British politics, we just launched an aircraft carrier without any aircraft
and according to various ex-Chiefs of the military, Tory cuts have ran the army and the navy into the ground.
The next time there is a Middle East war, and there's always a next time, Britain's contribution will probably be of the token kind, and that in itself is a blessing.
To paraphrase Bismarck, the Middle East is not worth the bones of one British Tommy.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
The USA in the Middle East is just part of them being the new British Empire. So they created a state that's so dependant on the US that it helps them keep an eye on that part of the world.
DS:90-S+G+++M++B-IPw40k03+D+A++/fWD-R++T(T)DM+ Warmachine MKIII record 39W/0D/6L
China or Saudi Arabia aren't trying to use their status as a democracy to bolster the legitimacy. of their actions, Israel is
Truthfully? I think the people who make up Israel stopped giving a flying feth about what the rest of the world thought back in 1940.
And with good reason. Hitler had his way with them, the Russians and Poles kept killing them even when they tried to go home, the Brits and French refused to take them, but put into new camps in Cyprus when they tried to get to Palestine. Then they were invaded multiple times over, and every time they won, their foreign opposition demanded that they just forgive and forget, and return their state to existing along lines arbitrarily drawn on a map prior to their country existing.
Their human rights abuses and blatant racism towards Palestinians are well documented, and I in no way endorse such actions. I do however, have complete sympathy for their annexation of certain areas like the Golan Heights. Why? Because if you go to war with a nation with the intent of committing genocide not once, but four times, and that nation then kicks your arse? You've little grounds for complaint when they slice off a small area of your adjoining territory to use as a buffer zone in case you do it again. Compared to what was agreed at the Treaty of Versailles, or indeed, most peace treaties signed in the last hundred years, losing control of the Golan Heights is small potatoes.
When the protestors keep bringing up issues like that as evidence of Israel's perfidy amongst the genuine issues though, it dilutes the message and just makes them go, 'Well you clearly are either an idiot or have it in for us too. Either way, we shall ignore you'.
I can't really say anything other than that I agree fully with what you just said. I have little sympathy for Israel's neighbours getting their asses kicked because they were dumb enough to attack someone much more powerful than them. It's the people that through no fault of their own get treated like dirt by Israel that I'm a bit miffed about.
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
I can't really say anything other than that I agree fully with what you just said. I have little sympathy for Israel's neighbours getting their asses kicked because they were dumb enough to attack someone much more powerful than them.
Well, the last few proper conventional wars were in no way a case of the various Middle Eastern states attacking a nation more powerful than them. Quite the reverse, Israel was the underdog being attacked on all fronts. In many cases, their own commanders thought they were done, the allied Arab nations were making all sorts of speeches about soaking the sand with Yid blood and driving the Jews back into the sea. In the face of that, I think Israel acted astonishingly humanely at that point in time as it was. They returned vast amounts of territory to Egypt without so much as a whimper in exchange for peace, and their war record against enemy civilians at the time was, as far as I'm aware(I could be wrong), exemplary.
When faced with that sort of rhetoric, to swipe a small section of territory after victory because its elevated, and the enemy keep sticking artillery on it is hardly out of order.
It's the people that through no fault of their own get treated like dirt by Israel that I'm a bit miffed about.
Aye. It's reprehensible, yet at the same time, sadly comprehensible. And the likes of Hamas do more damage to their own people than the Israelis do. It's just a muddy cycle of violence, blow and counterblow, racism engendered and racism earnt on both sides. It's a sad state of affairs, there's too much damage both ways to make a grand judgement on one side being right and the other wrong.
An Israeli soldier hits a palestinian boy because one of his friends was blown up by a Palestinian suicide bomber with a similar appearance, who in turn did what he did because his wife was hit by an Israeli air strike due to Hamas sheperded her into a building with a mortar to use as a human shield. Is the Israeli soldier wrong? Sure. His act of violence was wrong. As was the suicide bomber. As was Hamas, and so on. But in all of their heads, they're fulfilling their individual ideas of justice and retribution. There is no 'right' side at the end of the day.
That's what most of these 'Free Palestine' groups ignore. And to bring it back to politics, it's something that bugs me when Corbyn acts all Holier than Thou and snubs Israeli diplomats and visitors yet has no problem calling for Hamas to be removed from the list of terrorists. In my eyes, that makes him one of four things, a hypocrite, a liar, an idiot, or an anti-semite (or a mixture of any and all four).
This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2017/12/07 22:35:27
Aye. It's reprehensible, yet at the same time, sadly comprehensible. And the likes of Hamas do more damage to their own people than the Israelis do. It's just a muddy cycle of violence, blow and counterblow, racism engendered and racism earnt on both sides. It's a sad state of affairs, there's too much damage both ways to make a grand judgement on one side being right and the other wrong.
Keeping the Palestinians as a whole (not Hamas, not the activists, everyone) as second class citizens is definitely wrong, no matter how much bad blood is there.
Either give them full statehood and let them sort their mess on their own or give them Israeli citizenship, voice and vote.
There was a time when the Palestinians were basically integrated in Israeli life, rode the Egged buses, etc. The different Arab wars of aggression are one thing, what Israel did with the spoils afterwards lies entirely at their feet.
Keeping the Palestinians as a whole (not Hamas, not the activists, everyone) as second class citizens is definitely wrong, no matter how much bad blood is there.
Either give them full statehood and let them sort their mess on their own or give them Israeli citizenship, voice and vote.
There was a time when the Palestinians were basically integrated in Israeli life, rode the Egged buses, etc. The different Arab wars of aggression are one thing, what Israel did with the spoils afterwards lies entirely at their feet.
I think all those neighbours who spent vast amounts of time and money funding resistance/terrorist groups to kill Israelis, spark counterblows, keep the cycle of hatred going, and generate bad press might have a leeeeetle bit to do with it. It's not quite the case that the Israeli PM woke up one day , had a great(?) idea, and wrote 'ETHNIC DISCRIMINATION' on his to do list. It's been a gradually escalating case of tit for tat, action and counterreaction (and sometimes overreaction) for the last thirty years.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/12/07 23:01:53
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: You heavily implied it, and almost certainly deliberate. You've equated his choice not to attend a 6'Friends of Israel' dinner with....what? Why raise it if you're not making a pathetic, baseless insinuation?
No. Stop. Listen, please. There's more than one eel in that barrel, and if you jump to conclusions and project onto my posts, this will go nowhere.
I'm not calling him an anti-semite. What I'm doing, is pointing out (and I have evidenced it) that his normal rhetoric about sitting down with everyone to promote peace is clearly not evenly applied. It can't be that he has moral issues sitting down with people prepared to kill or commit atrocities, because he sits down with some very dubious characters over the years. It can't be that he has a problem with authoritarian governments, because he very literally took money to appear on Iranian television.
So what is it? It could be anti-semitism, certainly. That's one option. But only one. Another is that he's fallen prey to the same efforts as those University kids I mentioned earlier. It could be that he had a bad experience with an Israeli official which personally put him off them for life. It could be that his dad or some other social grouping of his imparted some subconscious biases to him. Really, there's a multiplicity of options stretching from the credible to the inane.
But really? That's beside the point. The evidenced fact here is simple; that he is willing to treat Israel differently to the way he treats everyone else. And that, in a nutshell, is a problem I have with many in the Labour Party. You say here:
You claim 'the left' has well documented anti-Semitism, yet fail to provide any supporting evidence.
but if you bothered to run a basic google search, you'll find yourself overloaded with evidence.
Here's three very respected historians signing a letter to the Times about the widespread anti-semitism hidden in the Labour Party as anti-Israeli criticism.
If you want more, it's really not hard. I could link to countless gaffes by the likes of Ken Livingstone, Nasreen Khan, and so on. I'll leave to dig for it yourself though, because in all seriousness, the hard left has always had problems with Jews, and denying that right now is like denying they were left wing. I mean, jeez, You should read some of the stuff Bakunin used to write.
You're making a lot of accusations, but providing absolutely zero proof.
Because my original point was about Galloway. Why would I provide proof about anti-semitism in the Labour Party when I was discussing George Galloway? I'm providing it now the conversation has moved in that direction, but there was certainly no call for it before.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bran Dawri wrote: [quote=Ketara 724548 9733381 494cf4449eec231a8665af128f4d8a2e.png
I don't know about the UK, but where I'm from there is and has been plenty of media coverage condemning both of the other two for various reasons. The reason governments don't condemn them as harshly (especially Saudi) is that they have things we actually want (oil and a stable country/ally in the ME for Saudi, cheap labour and a "let sleeping dogs lie" attitude for China). And for the record, I don't like the governments of all three.
Thing is, I'm not even referring particularly to the media coverage, that's just one leg. Where are the endless UN motions against dictatorial states? I think Israel has racked up more than every autocracy combined. Where are the multiple student protests and organised SU activities against the Iranian government? Where are the academic boycotts against Burma? The people vowing not to buy goods from Ivory Coast?
Another reason is somewhat less cynical (but slightly racist). Most people know the likes of Saudi and China are backwards, authoritarian states, and hence don't expect much in the way of good humanitarian attitudes. Whereas Israel is supposed to be a modern democracy, and hence open to reason and listening to criticism (news flash: the latter certainly isn't true), so the difference between what's expected and what actually happens is greater.
I think this is certainly a part of it, but only a small part of it. The uniqueness in the way that Israel is treated as a pariah state is an absolutely fascinating one with a great many causes, and the causes in every case differ. It's more of a wider cultural phenomenon than a simple party political case. The Labour Party appears to have been more susceptible to it than the Tories, but I think the Lib Dems are just as bad with it in many regards.
The difference I suppose, is that when I sit down and examine the different strands and causes behind it, it would appear to be the case that the Lib Dems fall more into the genuine human rights angle. Whereas the Labour Party has far more easily traced malicious ideological and anti-semitic elements at play.
This is true. What is equally true however, is that modern anti-semitism is usually cloaked as being 'anti-Israeli'. So how do you resolve these two dichotomies? Any statement can either be defended on the lines of 'I'm just criticising Israel', or attacked as 'That's anti-semitism'.
The answer is to carefully dissect the motivations and logic behind statements made and actions taken. Otherwise, legitimate discussion will be shut down under accusations of anti-semitism, and anti-semitism (to whatever degree) will be shielded.
That's all very well, but neither of those links link to actual antisemitism, just accusations of antisemitism, one of which is reported by the Telegraph of all fething papers.
Have you got any evidence of the Labour Party being anti-semitic, or are you just happy to support the narrative without actual evidence?
And by anti-semitic, I mean explicit racist attitudes towards Jews by the "Labour Party". I fully expect you to quote Naz Shah, and Ken Livingston, but those are comments made by individual members, who were then sanctioned by the party. What I would like you to prove is that the Labour Party is anti-semitic. Prove it. Point directly to the statement made on behalf of the party in the last 10 years that is straight anti-Jewish racism.
Pound to a pinch of gak you cannot, because it is bollocks swept up and inflamed by detractors that keeps getting brought up every time it's convenient by those hostile to the Labour Party.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/12/07 23:08:44
"All their ferocity was turned outwards, against enemies of the State, foreigners, traitors, saboteurs, thought-criminals" - Orwell, 1984
Keeping the Palestinians as a whole (not Hamas, not the activists, everyone) as second class citizens is definitely wrong, no matter how much bad blood is there.
Either give them full statehood and let them sort their mess on their own or give them Israeli citizenship, voice and vote.
There was a time when the Palestinians were basically integrated in Israeli life, rode the Egged buses, etc. The different Arab wars of aggression are one thing, what Israel did with the spoils afterwards lies entirely at their feet.
I think all those neighbours who spent vast amounts of time and money funding resistance/terrorist groups to kill Israelis, spark counterblows, keep the cycle of hatred going, and generate bad press might have a leeeeetle bit to do with it. It's not quite the case that the Israeli PM woke up one day , had a great(?) idea, and wrote 'ETHNIC DISCRIMINATION' on his to do list. It's been a gradually escalating case of tit for tat, action and counterreaction (and sometimes overreaction) for the last thirty years.
This is a "Chicken before the egg?" type scenario.
People who are biased towards Palestine will claim that Palestinian aggression is a response to Israeli oppression.
People who are biased towards Israel will claim that Israeli oppression is a response to Palestinian aggression.
Thats the nature of vicious cycles. Everybody is right.
That's all very well, but neither of those links link to actual anti-semitic, just accusations of antisemitism, one of which is reported by the Telegraph of all fething papers.
Have you got any evidence of the Labour Party being anti-semitic, or are you just happy to support the narrative without actual evidence? .
Just to clarify whether or not I'll be wasting my time; are you actually discounting the testimony of a current Labour MP as to a light atmosphere of anti-semitism being pervasive within his party? Because that's not an accusation, that's an eyewitness testimony from someone intimately involved within it. Someone who I daresay, has much more experience than either of us.
Therefore if you won't accept evidence at that level; then the odds are that you won't accept anything short of Jeremy Corbyn and fifty other MP's publicly getting 'DEATH TO YIDS' publicly tattooed on their foreheads. And I won't bother wasting my time.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2017/12/07 23:18:15
That's all very well, but neither of those links link to actual anti-semitic, just accusations of antisemitism, one of which is reported by the Telegraph of all fething papers.
Have you got any evidence of the Labour Party being anti-semitic, or are you just happy to support the narrative without actual evidence? .
Just to clarify whether or not I'll be wasting my time; are you actually discounting the testimony of a current Labour MP as to a light atmosphere of anti-semitism being pervasive within his party? Because that's not an accusation, that's an eyewitness testimony from someone intimately involved within it. Someone who I daresay, has much more experience than either of us.
Therefore if you won't accept evidence at that level; then the odds are that you won't accept anything short of Jeremy Corbyn and fifty other MP's publicly getting 'DEATH TO YIDS' publicly tattooed on their foreheads. And I won't bother wasting my time.
A current Labour MP who is, and has been a vocal opponent of Jeremy Corby and his leadership? What is the basis for his accusations? Where in either of those links is there anything other than an unequivocal condemnation by the Labour Party of antisemitism?
Are we to condemn the party because these people don't like what they hear said about the actions of the Israeli state, and that they choose to interpret as anti-semitic racism?
I think you are far to quick to state unequivocally that Labour is racist and anti-semitic because it suits your political narrative. There is actually no real evidence to support your argument apart from inflammatory articles in the right wing press.
Please have a read of this recent article, dated the 04th Dec 17 by the Jewish Voice for Labour about alleged antisemitism by Corbyn and the Labout Party...
They quote the Home affairs select committee in saying...
"There exist no reliable, empirical evidence to support the notion that there is a higher prevalence of antisemitic attitudes within the Labour Party than in any other political party."
So please, if you have some actual evidence other than opinion and conjecture, please provide it, otherwise you're just demonstrating your own political bias.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/12/08 00:23:42
"All their ferocity was turned outwards, against enemies of the State, foreigners, traitors, saboteurs, thought-criminals" - Orwell, 1984
Alright. Challenge accepted. So. Evidence of a lightly anti-semitic atmosphere pervading the Labour Party. I'll do more than a handful of blog posts or news articles, too (which are all ultimately opinion pieces).
1. Shami Chakrabarti was appointed to lead an enquiry into it recently. Generally considered to be a whitewash on account of the fact that she joined the Labour Party halfway through and then got a job immediately afterwards, her own report actually literally used the phrase 'an occasionally toxic atmosphere' with regards to anti-semitism in Labour, and "too much clear evidence... of ignorant attitudes". The report actually had to recommend that members refrain from using such appealing terms as 'Zio' in everyday discourse and communication. Most organisations don't usually have to actively recommend that sort of thing, you know?
2. The former Head of the Oxford Labour Club (which raises many prominent Labour politicians), upon ceasing to hold his post, said that many members 'have some kind of a problem with Jews'. No less than 32 former chairs and committee members signed an open letter opposing the OULC's decision to engage in a series of anti-apartheid rallies against Israel, describing them as ' little more than a gathering of propagandists seeking to dismantle the only majority-Jewish member-state of the United Nations.'
http://labourlist.org/2016/02/race-row-engulfs-oxford-university-labour-club/
While the Labour Leader has a proud record of campaigning against many types of racism, based on the evidence we have received, we are not persuaded that he fully appreciates the distinct nature of post-Second World War antisemitism. Unlike other forms of racism, antisemitic abuse often paints the victim as a malign and controlling force rather than as an inferior object of derision, making it perfectly possible for an ‘anti-racist campaigner’ to express antisemitic views. Jewish Labour MPs have been subject to appalling levels of abuse, including antisemitic death threats from individuals purporting to be supporters of Mr Corbyn. Clearly, the Labour Leader is not directly responsible for abuse committed in his name, but we believe that his lack of consistent leadership on this issue, and his reluctance to separate antisemitism from other forms of racism, has created what some have referred to as a ‘safe space’ for those with vile attitudes towards Jewish people. This situation has been further exacerbated by the Party’s demonstrable incompetence at dealing with members accused of antisemitism, as illustrated by the saga involving the suspension, re-admittance and re-suspension of Jackie Walker.s.
Not quite so complimentary of the Labour Party when you actually read the thing, eh? They very actively state that Corbyn's eladership has led to the creation of a 'safe space' for anti-semitism to flourish.
4. Evidence submitted to the above enquiry included an ESRC research council funded set of polls of the Labour membership. 1031 members was the sample size. Of that, 52% agreed that anti-semitism was a problem in Labour. This fell by about 7% after the party was opened up to Corbyn's newcomers on the £3 vote scheme, and most Labour members thought it was just as bad in other parties.Most of them also believed that it was a tool being used to batter Corbyn with, but the fact remains that about half the party members initially polled thought that there was a real issue with anti-semitism within Labour. https://esrcpartymembersprojectorg.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/balewebbpolettisubmission4chakrabarti3rdjune2016-1.pdf
5. The endless exposes of Labour activists or appointees suddenly revealed as holding horribly anti-semitic views. I won't bother with names or links, because I could literally spend an hour compiling a long list. Google is there for you if you want it that badly. Start with Ken Livingstone and Naz Shah, as previously stated, and work your down to the low fry like Jackie Walker.
6. Here's the testimony of the Chairman of the Parliamentary Labour Party and NEC:-
Mr Cryer, Labour MP for Leyton and Wanstead, described a "seeping poison" and warned that future generations might not realise that when it came to Nazism, "we were right and they were wrong".
As chairman of the Parliamentary Labour Party, he sits on the disputes panel of the National Executive Committee, which rules on what members have "said, written or tweeted", he told the audience.
"I have seen some of the tweets from paid up Labour Party members and I am not kidding you, it makes your hair stand up," he said.
Some Labour members dismiss reports of anti-Semitism as a myth, he said.
"But you don't have to look very far before you see it's not a myth...and there's no place in the Labour Party for stuff like that."
Another MP, Wes Streeting, said a "rump" of anti-Semites in Labour should be "driven out" of the party.
"It isn't anti-Semitic to criticise the Israeli government," he said.
"Unfortunately we see too many people examples of anti-Semitic language being used in order to do so."
8. I'm afraid that I will repeat the statement of John Mann, MP and chairperson of the All Party group on anti-semitism, that "Labour has a problem with anti-semitism that must be challenged". It's literally his job to keep an eye on these things, and just attempting to brush it off as party politics doesn't quite fly when seen next to all the other evidence above. If you want an interview where he discusses his personal motivations, try this on for size:-
https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/john-mann-interview-1.432418 Not quite "rahrah down with Corbyn", is it now? Especially given that he's been doing it since 2005, long before Corbyn's ascendancy was anything more one man's dream in a comfy bed after a good fish supper in Islington.
I suppose I could go on, but frankly, I'm tired of it now. If you still want to believe I'm inventing things to 'fit my political narrative' after the above, you are more than welcome to do so. As far as I'm concerned, I think I've substantiated my point with both qualitative and quantitative data. You can dismiss it all as people out to get old Corby, but that, to my mind, is far more about making things fit a contemporary political narrative than any interest I have in the matter.
This message was edited 11 times. Last update was at 2017/12/08 01:16:55
Ketara wrote: Alright. Challenge accepted. So. Evidence of a lightly anti-semitic atmosphere pervading the Labour Party. I'll do more than a handful of blog posts or news articles, too (which are all ultimately opinion pieces).
1. Shami Chakrabarti was appointed to lead an enquiry into it recently. Generally considered to be a whitewash on account of the fact that she joined the Labour Party halfway through and then got a job immediately afterwards, her own report actually literally used the phrase 'an occasionally toxic atmosphere' with regards to anti-semitism in Labour, and "too much clear evidence... of ignorant attitudes". The report actually had to recommend that members refrain from using such appealing terms as 'Zio' in everyday discourse and communication. Most organisations don't usually have to actively recommend that sort of thing, you know?
2. The former Head of the Oxford Labour Club, upon ceasing to hold his post, said that many members 'have some kind of a problem with Jews'. No less than 32 former chairs and committee members signed an open letter opposing the OULC's decision to engage in a series of anti-apartheid rallies against Israel, describing them as ' little more than a gathering of propagandists seeking to dismantle the only majority-Jewish member-state of the United Nations.'
http://labourlist.org/2016/02/race-row-engulfs-oxford-university-labour-club/
While the Labour Leader has a proud record of campaigning against many types of racism, based on the evidence we have received, we are not persuaded that he fully appreciates the distinct nature of post-Second World War antisemitism. Unlike other forms of racism, antisemitic abuse often paints the victim as a malign and controlling force rather than as an inferior object of derision, making it perfectly possible for an ‘anti-racist campaigner’ to express antisemitic views. Jewish Labour MPs have been subject to appalling levels of abuse, including antisemitic death threats from individuals purporting to be supporters of Mr Corbyn. Clearly, the Labour Leader is not directly responsible for abuse committed in his name, but we believe that his lack of consistent leadership on this issue, and his reluctance to separate antisemitism from other forms of racism, has created what some have referred to as a ‘safe space’ for those with vile attitudes towards Jewish people. This situation has been further exacerbated by the Party’s demonstrable incompetence at dealing with members accused of antisemitism, as illustrated by the saga involving the suspension, re-admittance and re-suspension of Jackie Walker.s.
Not quite so complimentary of the Labour Party when you actually read the thing, eh? They very actively state that Corbyn's eladership has led to the creation of a 'safe space' for anti-semitism to flourish.
4. Evidence submitted to the above enquiry included an ESRC research council funded set of polls of the Labour membership. 1031 members was the sample size. Of that, 52% agreed that anti-semitism was a problem in Labour. This fell by about 7% after the party was opened up to Corbyn's newcomers on the £3 vote scheme, and most Labour members thought it was just as bad in other parties.Most of them also believed that it was a tool being used to batter Corbyn with, but the fact remains that about half the party members initially polled thought that there was a real issue with anti-semitism within Labour. https://esrcpartymembersprojectorg.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/balewebbpolettisubmission4chakrabarti3rdjune2016-1.pdf
5. The endless exposes of Labour activists or appointees suddenly revealed as holding horribly anti-semitic views. I won't bother with names or links, because I could literally spend an hour compiling a long list. Google is there for you if you want it that badly. Start with Ken Livingstone and Naz Shah, as previously stated, and work your down to the low fry like Jackie Walker.
6. Here's the testimony of the Chairman of the Parliamentary Labour Party and NEC:-
Mr Cryer, Labour MP for Leyton and Wanstead, described a "seeping poison" and warned that future generations might not realise that when it came to Nazism, "we were right and they were wrong".
As chairman of the Parliamentary Labour Party, he sits on the disputes panel of the National Executive Committee, which rules on what members have "said, written or tweeted", he told the audience.
"I have seen some of the tweets from paid up Labour Party members and I am not kidding you, it makes your hair stand up," he said.
Some Labour members dismiss reports of anti-Semitism as a myth, he said.
"But you don't have to look very far before you see it's not a myth...and there's no place in the Labour Party for stuff like that."
Another MP, Wes Streeting, said a "rump" of anti-Semites in Labour should be "driven out" of the party.
"It isn't anti-Semitic to criticise the Israeli government," he said.
"Unfortunately we see too many people examples of anti-Semitic language being used in order to do so."
8. I'm afraid that I will repeat the statement of John Mann, MP and chairperson of the All Party group on anti-semitism, that "Labour has a problem with anti-semitism that must be challenged". It's literally his job to keep an eye on these things, and just attempting to brush it off as party politics doesn't quite fly when seen next to all the other evidence above. If you want an interview where he discusses his personal motivations, try this on for size:-
https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/john-mann-interview-1.432418 Not quite "rahrah down with Corbyn", is it now? Especially given that he's been doing it since 2005, long before Corbyn's ascendancy was anything more one man's dream in a comfy bed after a good fish supper in Islington.
I suppose I could go on, but frankly, I'm tired of it now. If you still want to believe I'm inventing things to 'fit my political narrative' after the above, you are more than welcome to do so. As far as I'm concerned, I think I've substantiated my point with both qualitative and quantitative data. You can dismiss it all as people out to get old Corby, but that, to my mind, is far more about making things fit a contemporary political narrative than any interest I have in the matter.
That's a lot of words, but thin on actual substance, and I look forward to checking your sources and tearing them to bits tomorrow, but not now as it's quarter to one in the morning and I need to get some sleep.
"All their ferocity was turned outwards, against enemies of the State, foreigners, traitors, saboteurs, thought-criminals" - Orwell, 1984
I'll be frank guv, if your first thought at looking at that lot is 'thin on substance, will tear to shreds!!', we're both wasting our time.
You'll produce a book review disagreeing with the books linked, point out the sections of the commission into anti-semitism that says that there's no statistical data proving Labour is anti-semitic (unsurprising, given you can't exactly stick out a poll saying 'Do you hate Jews'), discount the MP's as having nefarious political motives, say that members only have an empirical perception which can be wrong, etc, etc. We both know anyone can argue with anything if they want to, and the above post most certainly isn't a watertight 100% proven case. So if that's the angle you're coming at it from, you might as well save your breath and time on the response, I've just done it for you there.
But then again, I wasn't out to prove definitively that the Labour has mildly subconscious anti-semitic atmosphere. Christ, I can't even think as to how you'd ever be able to to gather the data for that. All I am interested in doing with the above is establishing that what I have stated thus far, right or wrong, is a logical and reasonable belief to hold with the evidence at hand. Which I think I have done. Certainly, I think I've proved that I've more strings to my bow than 'some inflammatory articles in the right wing press', as you so succinctly put it.
So in future, please can the accusations about me trying to get things to fit 'my political narrative or 'demonstrating my bias'?. Sure, I have my own perception on politics sure (don't we all?), but I'm not some closet Tory spy out to sabotage Corbyn, or thicko quoting Daily Mail headlines. I usually have a good reason for thinking something, and if I don't, I try to admit it.
This message was edited 9 times. Last update was at 2017/12/08 01:29:51
Graphite wrote: "By September the entirely of Kent will be on fire. Cannibalism will have become the staple food of Yorkshire and nothing has entered or left the pulsing radioactive cloud at the border of Scotland for three weeks."
Keeping the Palestinians as a whole (not Hamas, not the activists, everyone) as second class citizens is definitely wrong, no matter how much bad blood is there.
Either give them full statehood and let them sort their mess on their own or give them Israeli citizenship, voice and vote.
There was a time when the Palestinians were basically integrated in Israeli life, rode the Egged buses, etc. The different Arab wars of aggression are one thing, what Israel did with the spoils afterwards lies entirely at their feet.
I think all those neighbours who spent vast amounts of time and money funding resistance/terrorist groups to kill Israelis, spark counterblows, keep the cycle of hatred going, and generate bad press might have a leeeeetle bit to do with it. It's not quite the case that the Israeli PM woke up one day , had a great(?) idea, and wrote 'ETHNIC DISCRIMINATION' on his to do list. It's been a gradually escalating case of tit for tat, action and counterreaction (and sometimes overreaction) for the last thirty years.
So? We're taking about how Israel discriminates their own people (non citizens but they live in an area under their control where Israel has a sovereign claim to).
The neighbours are a dodgy bunch but that doesn't give you any right to keep your daughter in the basement. Citizenship or real Independence, there's no middle ground.
May has folded like a wet piece of paper.. just as leavers have warned the we are leaving in name only..... what fething stich up by the politicos.
Pay them loads of money
Eu court to rule on eu citizens for the next 8 years (over and above the uk court)
And the eu might just talk about trade.
The Maybot is between the devil with a sword and the hard, rock-strewn blue sea.
The Conservative Party owns Brexit lock stock and two barrels. They invented the idea. They offered the referendum and ran the crappy Remain campaign.
Then they basically lost their attempt to become a government strong enough to deliver anything.
Unfortunately everyone knows that Hard Brexit is going to an economic disaster. The only authoritative reports that don’t say that, are the official government ones that David Davis has spent the past 18 months not having written.
May is desperate to avoid this happening, because the fallout will destroy the Conservatives as the party of sound economics for a generation.
The Conservatives though are in a civil war. Most of the party is Remain or soft Leave, but there is a powerful fifth column of Hard Brexiteers. Some of these are in denial about the economic dislocation, others see Brexit as a way of enriching themselves at the country’s expense. E.g. Bozo Johnson hopes he will become Prime Minister.
However, these are powerful people with rich backers. They are capable of unseating May if she doesn’t toe close enough to their line.
What May has done is to craft a text that solves the Ireland Border problem and the European Citizen problem with the absolutely lightest possible touch of EU-ism.
It avoids any specifics, leaving them to be sorted out with more time and effort. It gets us on to the trade talks, which are absolutely crucial.
Most importantly, it’s a deal that the majority of the Conservative Party and the House of Commons can get behind.
Unfortunately everyone knows that Hard Brexit is going to an economic disaster. The only authoritative reports that don’t say that, are the official government ones that David Davis has spent the past 18 months not having written
And the Legatum institute that has been the mind behind the whole thing.
