Forum menu
Yes of course and if they haven’t already I’m sure they will be.
That's the point. He wasn't, Thomas Gardiner refused to do it against the advice of his staff.
Refused to fast track it and...?
Refused to fast track it and…?
My recollection is he refused to take any action whatsoever. You'd need to watch the documentary yourself to double check my memory.
Makes no difference to the point in dispute. You're saying the quote came from an anonymous twitter account, potentially a false flag. I'm saying it was an identified Labour member.
You're now saying that the correct action WRT the guy who said it is to "kick him out quick".
Many people would agree with you on that last point.
The Labour party certainly has. In 2003 Labour abolished Section 28, which banned the “promotion” of homosexuality in schools.
Corbyn abstained from that in a whipped vote.
Really?! I’ve stopped looking at Corbyn’s past parliamentary voting record… mostly because it makes me feel like a complete mug for voting for Labour with him as leader.
Yes I hope that person is kicked out for racism and sexism.
Okay, this popped up when I searched “Corbyn Section 28”…
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1131998300490670080?s=21
But you’re saying he didn’t vote for that policy at the time? I’ll do more digging…
He didn’t vote, you’re right…
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/divisions/pw-2003-03-10-109-commons/mp/10133
His voting record on such things is generally good/supportive though, so I’m not sure we should read much into it.
Today’s choice of meeting was very odd though.
Edit: by “odd”, I mean that with so many respectable people who happen to be Jewish, including his MPs and Peers, failing to even get a reply to their emails when requesting meetings… he chooses to meet with this guy, now, this week.
He's trolling us all! Probably a brexiteer aswell
I’m not sure we should read much into it.
Agree. I just stated a fact I heard on a podcast a few weeks back, I offered no conclusion. Certainly abstaining from one vote doesn't make you homophobic.
Probably a brexiteer aswell
He *is* a Brexiteer and has been for 40 odd years. Hardcore Brexiteer in the Foot/Benn mould.
I mean that with so many respectable people who happen to be Jewish, including his MPs and Peers, failing to even get a reply to their emails when requesting meetings… he chooses to meet with this guy, now, this week.
Brexit is electorally damaging to Labour whereas AS won't cost them many votes. With my tin foil hat on I can see every reason to fuel the AS story to keep the Brexit stuff out of the media.
ctk
Member
He’s trolling us all! Probably a brexiteer aswell
As in his guest Shraga Stern is probably a brexiteer & therefore the most infuriating guest JC could possibly invite.
Just to throw another aspect in: notice how the antisemitism abuse, and it is abuse, is pretty much exclusively aimed at females. Including rape threats.
Nice. Stay classy.
So it’s basically pretty ****ing Misogynistic too. In some cases violently so. As well as being openly racist - let’s call it what it is. The term ‘antisemitism’ just means racist. You can’t pick and choose. You either are or you aren't
Just remind me again what the point of the Labour Party is if it’s prepared to tolerate this?
And the left wears it’s moral high ground over the far right like a badge of honour.
Why exactly? Because from where i’m Looking, you’re now both has bad as each other.
From where are you looking BinBins? Are you in the middle? Neither left nor right but always "right"
Stop looking at twitter its messing with your reasoning skills.
outofbreath
Member
The Labour party certainly has. In 2003 Labour abolished Section 28, which banned the “promotion” of homosexuality in schools.
Corbyn abstained from that in a whipped vote.
Nope, he did not- he was absent, he didn't abstain (so was Tony Blair, funnily enough)- the vote passed 368 to 76, with over 200 MPs absent since it was a foregone conclusion.
You're not going to get anywhere attacking Corbyn's record on LGBT+ rights, not even by misrepresenting it. He voted against clause 28 in 1987, and he was one of only 36 MPs who voted to push for its repeal in 2000 when the House of Lords was blocking it. (and before that, in fact- he was heavily involved in the 85 conference resolution that any future Labour government should criminalise anti-gay discrimination). It's pretty much the only thing I knew about Corbyn before he ran for leader.
Agreed.
Which makes today’s meeting seem even more out of place.
Check out this strong contribution from Corbyn in 2000…
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199900/cmhansrd/vo000725/debtext/00725-47.htm
kelvin
Subscriber
Agreed.
Which makes today’s meeting seem even more out of place.
Is it though? I mean, Stern says that there was no organised meeting- he was in parliament on other business, and then saw Corbyn having lunch and joined him "for a chat". If that's a "meeting", then I've had "a meeting with Jeremy Corbyn in which the two discussed scottish independence". I'm not seeing the significance of any of it, except that it's another opportunity for people to have a pop.
It's the "wrong sort of jews" thing again, of course, but it's really overtly weird to me that on the day that all the talk is about Labour not welcoming jews, Corbyn gets ripped to bits for welcoming a jew. Don't think it's too cynical to suggest we'd be seeing "Corbyn refuses to meet with Jewish community leader" if he'd got up and walked away, either. Just because he represents from a part of the faith that probably more people have issues with doesn't mean he shouldn't have a voice or that the mainstream should be free to shout him down and marginalise him.
(I don't see what Stern hopes to gain from it, mind- he's been making a lot of noise about sex and LGBT+ education in schools, but Corbyn's about the last person that's ever going to help them with that...)
The "wrong sort of jew" thing is always pretty interesting imo... Like, haredi jews are going to be the biggest jewish group in the UK within the next decades- they have large families and fewer people leaving the faith, while everywhere else in the faith the population is aging and the birthrate is lower than the death rate.
But for now they're definitely "the wrong sort of jew"- they have no voting rights in the Board of Deputies, which claims to represent all british jews but is openly hostile to them (and to the most liberal side, too). Jewish Labour treats them like pariahs rather than representing them, the Chronicle's very critical in a way that the mainstream press probably wouldn't dare. It's a side of the faith that a lot of people don't really want to talk about... But they can't attack them in the same way that they do the liberal end of the spectrum. They're also the group that suffers the most from antisemitism, since they're so easily identified and follow a more divisive version of the faith... but they're not usually the people you see talking about it.
It's all pretty fascinating imo- real human politics on the large and tiny scale, and some really powerful demographic forces at work. What happens when the numbers finally tip? Will the current top dogs manage to keep that position? Will they welcome them in, or will they get toppled, or just become irrelevant? Or will they be able to carry on claiming to be the one true voice of judaism as it gets less and less true every day?
Nice twist.
No, not nice… the opposite.
I should have gone with my first instinct and stayed well away from this thread once the antisemitism issue became core to it.
Brexit is electorally damaging to Labour whereas AS won’t cost them many votes.
Yep, most people probably didn't care than much about poor handling of antisemitism a year ago and a lot of those that did are probably bored of it now. It is not an issue that is going to be impacting the lives of the majority of voters. Much the same as majority of people don't really care that the tory party are a bit anti muslim.
I think it boils down to the majority of people not being 100% non racist.
Nope, he did not- he was absent, he didn’t abstain
This is the rabbit hole of all rabbit holes but he *did* abstain: You either vote or you abstain. There's no other option. If there was MPs could avoid all blame on difficult controversial votes by simply not turning up.
Nobody in this thread is suggesting he abstained because he didn't want to vote for it, but he *did* abstain.
I thought the interesting bit of my post was that George Osborne, John Bercow & Boris Johnson all voted to abolish Section 28 against their whip. All the candidates in the Tory leadership contest (including Boris) could/can point to the kind of one nation Tory liberal Heritage required to park their tanks right on the centre left bit on the lawn Labour have retreated from. Which is exactly what they need to do. You don't win elections appealing to your core vote, they're already onside.
Sorry for the massive digression/stream of conciousness.
Stern says that there was no organised meeting- he was in parliament on other business, and then saw Corbyn having lunch and joined him “for a chat”.
I've not read about it but that sounds likely, the term 'meeting' always sounded a bit dubious.
My sympathy is 100pc with Corbyn on this one. He's under pressure for being anti-jew. A bloke who looks a bit Jewish rocks up for a chat. Of course he's going to engage with him as visibly as he can. JC can't reasonably google the guy on the spot to see if there are any bear traps waiting and google might not even have identified issues with the guy before it hit the news. I'd have done the same as JC, I'd be suspicious of anyone who says they wouldn't.
Mind you, his strange record on who he will meet and who he won't meet is pretty unhelpful.
Party disciplinary procedures are swift and decisive for some.
For others... not seen much..
More shooting of messengers
Party disciplinary procedures are swift and decisive for some.
For others… not seen much..
Keeps Labour's insane position on Brexit out the news though.
Can someone remind me what it is? They will oppose no deal, or *any* deal the current Government negotiate.
However they will then negotiate a deal of their own and put it to a referendum and campaign *against* their own deal.
Have I got that right?
Who knows?
Seems like a lot of Labour MP's are now favouring backing a Boris Johnson No Deal Brexit
I note that they've been allowed to voice that without any comment from 'The Leadership', so one can only assume that though supporting the Lib Dems will immediately get you kicked out of the party, saying you'll back the Tories No Deal Brexit plans is all absolutely fine
These people complaining about AS in Labour (the peers were mostly Blair appointees) could make a really serious strong case if they came up with names, dates and evidence.
Naomi Klein supports BDS, what does that make her?
These people complaining about AS in Labour (the peers were mostly Blair appointees)
Quite a stark reminder of how far Labour has fallen when Blair's buddies are the moral backbone of the party.
the peers were mostly Blair appointees
Not.... *pause for dramatic effect*... BLAIRITES?!!!!
*gasp*
Well that explains it all then. Its all a dastardly plot by those bloody centrists
Come the glorious revolution, comrades....
Party disciplinary procedures are swift and decisive for some.
Her description seemed spot on to me… certainly looks like a “bunker mentality” to many of us poor media misled saps outside politics.
if they came up with names, dates and evidence
They have. That’s the whole point.
Naomi Klein supports BDS, what does that make her?
Many people fully support the boycott (I still do, when others seem to have forgotten about it) without ever resorting to antisemitism.
Party disciplinary procedures are swift and decisive for some.
You do realise that wouldnt fall under "Party disciplinary procedure" dont you? Thats only if she got kicked out or the whip withdrawn.
Indeed… it’s the action of those in the “bunker” alone to sack her… not the party.
Morning comrade.
Thanks for clearing that up. Will she just be airbrushed out of the politburo photographs then?
She ain't a haredi, must be a wrong 'un. Damned good writer too.
Damned good writer too.
One of the best.
Thanks for clearing that up. Will she just be airbrushed out of the politburo photographs then?
You know you could admit to writing rubbish rather than resorting to your primary school responses.
The point was she was sacked from her post for pointing out the obvious. Other front benchers can defy the whip and stay in place.
Many people fully support the boycott (I still do, when others seem to have forgotten about it) without ever resorting to antisemitism.
And of those some will be accused of it anyway.
Problem is both extremes see advantages in blurring being Jewish and being Israeli together.
Sorry Comrade. Looks like its off to the gulag for me then, eh? 😀
Jeremy Corbyn supporters react with humour and good grace to mockery of his Brexit position
The point was she was sacked from her post for pointing out the obvious.
No the "point" being made was an incorrect comparison of two different things.
Do you agree that Binners was correct in doing so?
Then can discuss the pros and cons of the sacking (whilst I would agree with her statement to some extent (with the difference that half the people in the bunker werent more interested in attacking inside than out) given that she is deputy leader does make it a tad awkward)
Do you agree that Binners was correct in doing so?
Yes… both the Leader & his team, and the party system they have ensured they have a strangle hold on, are quite arbitrary about who they discipline and how. No, not arbitrary, ruthlessly self interested, to the point of damaging the party they serve and the country it should be looking to govern.
given that she is deputy leader does make it a tad awkward
Well its been open season on the deputy leader in the commons for the last 3 years, so surely this is the next logical step.
This kind of thing will stop once the non-believers have all been purged and the party can live in beautiful, irrelevant, ideologically-pure isolation, in permanent opposition.
Won't that be lovely, comrades?
Ah wicked, another "centrist" echo chamber filled with misrepresentation!
Because from where i’m Looking, you’re now both has bad as each other.
0.06% of Labour members (less than population average) have antisemitic views
60% of Conservative members do not want a Muslim PM
Galaxy brain thinking: Hmm, yes, this is exactly the same
Did you also know that 198% of people on internet forums can pluck figures out of the air to help back their position?
Makes you think...
'They have. That's the whole point.'
The people complaining on the Panorama programme wouldn't even name themselves.
If you think that no one has been provided with “names, dates and evidence” of antisemitism in the Party, then you are defending the indefensible without even bothering to take the time to look into what you are defending.
> waves hands around <
“There is no problem, it’s all just trumped up nonsense pushed by our enemies”
I’m out of this thread ‘till it returns to being about something other than antisemitism.
Yes… both the Leader & his team, and the party system they have ensured they have a strangle hold on, are quite arbitrary about who they discipline and how.
So you are also claiming that the selection of the front bench and general party discipline are the same thing? You dont think there are different standards/controls for each?
Interesting.
No, I’m suggesting that the decisions being made as regards both have now become about protecting Jeremy and his inner bunker rather than working for the wider interests of the party and the country. In addition, others have pointed out how the party disciplinary procedure is now tightly controlled, and I would suggest abused, by the same very tight knit group of people surrounding the Leader.
Ta ta!
I think the worst thing is the disappointment. Usually this forum is full of actual debate, people willing to listen to each other's point of view. But all the politics threads recently have descended into willful misrepresentation and a complete inability to admit even the slightest sense that a poster might have been wrong.
Did you also know that 198% of people on internet forums can pluck figures out of the air to help back their position?
0.06 was the figure from a Labour spokesperson, quoted in an article in the JC
60% - and here, you're right, I got the detail wrong - of conservative members think Islam is a threat. It was only just under half who would not accept a Muslim PM.
Anyway, I'm oot. I don't know what Corbyn has done to binners - maybe he nicked your chips at school - but your crusade against him is getting really boring.
*posts Monty Python memes, complains about other posters being sixth formers*
We're doing a survey of party members, sir, would you mind answering a few questions?
Certainly.
Firstly, what do you think about Jewish people?
I think we need rid of the dirty, money-grubbing bastards! They're secretly running the planet you know. Enslaving whole populations to enrich themselves. Oh.... hang on a minute... this is a trick question isn't it? Actually, I think they're all lovely.
Thanks. And whats your favourite biscuit?
That stat had nothing to do with surveys of attitudes/views within the membership, it was just a meaningless figure offered up as distraction. Something to do with the percentage of members facing disciplinary action for antisemitism, but I can’t be sure, it was all quite opaque.
I know I should be staying out of this, but such misrepresentation in a post complaining about misrepresentation made me itch.
There is a big difference between members of a party and the general public. Not much you can do about members of the public having racist views and saying racist stuff (within the law) but if they did it in my party they would be straight out. And as leader of the party I would have made sure it was dealt with within a week of it coming to my attention and not ignoring it, blaming other stuff etc,. for 2 years. I would then be in a strong position to dispute the false claims and open them up publicly for examination so people could see they were false.
Really not that difficult.
Now it looks like it might be Steve Bell's turn:
Just heard on the radio Labour peers plan an unprecedented no confidence vote on JC...
Baroness Hayter is being interviewed on Radio 4 at the moment. She found out she had been sacked via the Corbynite social media channels (which appear to be the only way he communicates with the world). They announced her sacking without any consultation with her. She has still had no contact at all with Corbyns office.
Corbyns office have been asked for a comment on it but have said that nobody was available.
She's commented, quite correctly, that if you want to prove that you don't have a 'bunker mentality' its probably best not to shoot the messenger. Again.
Just heard on the radio Labour peers plan an unprecedented no confidence vote on JC…
Doesn't mean a thing. Even if the MPs had a vote of no confidence (again) the £3 blackshirts would just give him another go. Again.
Doesn’t mean a thing. Even if the MPs had a vote of no confidence (again) the £3 blackshirts would just give him another go. Again.
Only if he wants the job, and I don't think he does. He's got the required rule changes to ensure the next leader will be from his wing of the party, he can go any time now with his job done.
I suspect he's only been staying because of the the people chanting his name and to take the flak for the next incumbent in the (long) run up to an election. Well people have stopped chanting and an election could be just around the corner.
He might be glad of a good excuse to quit.
Not sure where Unite fit into this. They seem keen to keep him on and I don't really know why.
The trouble with that is that he'll only be allowed to go if Seamas says he can go.
And Seamas doesn't look like he's quite completed his task of making the Labour party completely and utterly unelectable just yet (so very nearly there) as the Tory's keep making his job harder. Just when he thinks he's got it done and dusted, up pops Chris Grayling, Andrea Leadsome, Dominic Raab or some other six-toed, born-to-rule pony-****er.
Corbyn does remain his greatest possible asset for the task in hand though, so for the time being I suspect he'll be going nowhere. Literally and metaphorically
Unelectable. Anyone mentioned that yet I’m not reading another 460 pages to find out.
I think it's best if you don't compare your party leader to Hitler. I assume you critics were similarly supportive of Ken Livingstone when he compared a newspaper reporter to a Nazi?
I assume you critics were similarly supportive of Ken Livingstone when he compared a newspaper reporter to a Nazi?
Not sure if I count as a critic but personally I had no problem with that comparison. He was just making the point the newspaper guy was just following orders. I also had no problem with KL's 'Hitler was a zionist' comment. In the context he was talking about it he was correct. Not sure it was wise for a senior politician to mention Nazis at all in public discourse but I didn't feel the comparisons were wrong. In the journo case KL wasn't calling the guy a mass murderer, he was calling him an "order follower".
I know for a fact JC has compared journalists to Vermin, and I think he had a point. Is Vermin better than Nazi? I'm not sure it is.
He was just making the point the newspaper guy was just following orders.
I believe this comment came after the reporter identified himself as Jewish.
I think it’s best if you don’t compare your party leader to Hitler
Maybe try taking the tinfoil helmet off for a bit comrade.
She didn't accuse him of being some kind of nazi. She accused him and his team of having a bunker mentality, rather than implying any genocidal instincts towards Jews, or owt.
Whats funny is that since sacking her (without actually communicating with her) Corbyns team have been comically efficient in proving her assertion correct. But I suppose when you live in a bunker, its difficult to see even the most obvious....
I think it’s best if you don’t compare your party leader to Hitler.
It does seem supremely arrogant and distasteful, especially seeing as the criticism actually relates specifically to the accusations of antisemitism. It’s not surprising she was fired, really.
Genuine question; how much of the antisemitism row do people think originated from the conflation of (understandable) criticism of the government of Israel with (antisemitic) criticism of Jews in general?
Seems to be an easy way to spread muck, although I completely recognise that stupid/ignorant/racist stuff has been said by stupid/ignorant/racist people.
I believe this comment came after the reporter identified himself as Jewish.
That's not my recollection and it's hard to imagine how that conversation would go:
Paparazzi Vermin: Hi, I'm Jewish.
Seems unlikely.
My recollection is the Journo said he was Jewish after he'd been accused of following orders.
Maybe try taking the tinfoil helmet off for a bit comrade.
She didn’t accuse him of being some kind of nazi. She accused him and his team of having a bunker mentality, rather than implying any genocidal instincts towards Jews, or owt.
When it comes to spin, you have much to learn from your hero Alastair Campbell. In actual
fact she compared him to the last days of Hitler. Funny how you missed that reference out.
Now you can get back to stamping your feet.
My recollection is the Journo said he was Jewish after he’d been accused of following orders.
My recollection is that Livingstone carried on with the comparison after he had been told. Which seems antisemitic to me.
Genuine question; how much of the antisemitism row do people think originated from the conflation of (understandable) criticism of the government of Israel with (antisemitic) criticism of Jews in general?
As was mentioned earlier, it's difficult to see how sending death threats and torrents of abuse to Margaret Hodge and Luciana Berger for no other reason than being Jewish and not being big fans of JC, actually advance the chances of a two state solution.
In actual fact she compared him to the last days of Hitler.
I think the 'bunker mentality' reference, rather than any implication of being genocidal, is fairly obvious to all but the professionally offended who are trying to conflate it with something it clearly isn't, for whatever reason
Genuine question; how much of the antisemitism row do people think originated from the conflation of (understandable) criticism of the government of Israel with (antisemitic) criticism of Jews in general?
None IMHO. All the alleged anti Semitic comments I've seen have been nothing to do with Israel or Palestine. Can you think of an example of an anti-semetic comment that has been raised that you think was a misunderstood criticism of the government of Israel?
Taking Rasnos example of Ken Livingstone from above I can't see any element of criticism of the government of Israel in it. [1]
Calling female MPs 'Zionist Cum Bags' isn't criticism of the government of Israel either.
On a tangent: The LibDems, Torys, Greens and SNP just don't seem to suffer from this level of name calling. The Tory party is utterly split and they still appear civil to each other. Leaving aside the Anti Semitism claims Labour member just don't seem to engage in a very high level of discourse. It's straight to the Ad Hom. Even if you conclude that there is no Anti-Semitism whatsover how is calling each other 'Cum buckets' a good idea?
[1] Mind ewe it doesn't seem anti-semtic to me either.
My recollection is that Livingstone carried on with the comparison after he had been told. Which seems antisemitic to me.
Ok, I can't be bothered to check so I'll grant you that instance of Anti Semitism in the Labour party.
I think the ‘bunker mentality’ reference, rather than any implication of being genocidal, is fairly obvious to all but the professionally offended who are trying to conflate it with something it clearly isn’t, for whatever reason
I think your continued insistence on ignoring the reference to Hitler makes it pretty obvious to all that you're not going to let the facts get in the way of another one of your toddler temper tantrums.
Calling female MPs ‘Zionist Cum Bags’ isn’t criticism of the government of Israel either.
Interesting one that, because as well as being incredibly rude and offensive, it strikes me as anti Zionist rather than antisemitic, per se. Is it possible to be anti Zionist without being antisemitic? Many Jews think so. I’m interested, and on the fence, as I don’t have a dog in the fight. What is obvious is that both sides are using accusations of various forms of racism for political point scoring, which kinda cheapens the whole argument.
On a tangent: The LibDems, Torys, Greens and SNP just don’t seem to suffer from this level of name calling.
Do you reckon that would be the case, particularly for the tories, if the same amount of effort was put into it?
Have you ventured near the telegraph comment boards. Admittedly many of those like Binners will just be whiners unwilling to try and change their party but not all.
I think your continued insistence on ignoring the reference to Hitler makes it pretty obvious to all that you’re not going to let the facts get in the way of another one of your toddler temper tantrums.
Context, dear boy. Context.
So, seeing as I'm clearly missing something here (I'm not very bright), as well as the obvious 'bunker mentality' reference, in the context in which she used it, what is she accusing him of?
Feel free to give me the benefit of your superior interpretive powers...
Ok, I can’t be bothered to check so I’ll grant you that instance of Anti Semitism in the Labour party.
How very gracious of you.
More seriously, you were (as most people do) separating criticism of Israel from anti-semitism. Yet the International Remembrance Holocaust Association conflates the two in the guidelines that accompany its definition. The Jerusalem Post reported approvingly that "One can thus authoritatively claim that promoting BDS (boycott, divestment & sanctions), which focuses exclusively on Israel and/or the disputed areas, is antisemitic."
Context, dear boy. Context.
So, seeing as I’m clearly missing something here (I’m not very bright), as well as the obvious ‘bunker mentality’ reference, in the context in which she used it, what is she accusing him of?
Feel free to give me the benefit of your superior interpretive powers…
First you tell me that the context makes it ok to compare Corbyn to Hitler, then you tell me that you're missing something.
You're right that you're missing something: a scintilla of sincerity.
More seriously, you were (as most people do) separating criticism of Israel from anti-semitism. Yet the International Remembrance Holocaust Association conflates the two in the guidelines that accompany its definition.
And yet the LP were hounded to adopt it in toto.
The Jerusalem post can claim what it likes, but none of the antisemitism claims as regards party members have anything to do with support for BDS.
And try talking about having a bunker mentality without any reference to Downfall…
First you tell me that the context makes it ok to compare Corbyn to Hitler, then you tell me that you’re missing something.
You’re right that you’re missing something: a scintilla of sincerity.
Eh? .... erm.... ok....?
Thanks for clearing that all up for me.
FFS - stay out of it Kelvin.
And yet the LP were hounded to adopt it in toto.
Yeah, I found that quite troubling.