This has become ludicrous. Yes the evidence says police have been sent to learn new techniques but no, not kneeling on the necks, not that, everything but that. To criticise Israel is a conspiracy against jews?
First of all were the Minneapolis police officers that killed Floyd trained by ISS?
Not seen any evidence they were, just conspiracy theory
2nd point is question of why Peake dropped it on there anyway, American police have been killing black people for some time now, they have not needed ISS help it added nothing to the narrative other than somehow attributing blame to Israel, for an obviously domestic problem
Was it anti-Semitic, not directly,but still in light AS problems labour have had & how it was weaponised against Corbyn, as well as alienating Jews away from labour even further
Making RLBs tweeting of the article A RIDICULOUSLY STUPID THING TO DO, especially with EHRC report coming in a few weeks
She's a shadow cabinet minister, she has to be smarter than that
(And none of that's to say some Isaeli policy hasn't been an internationally recognised disgrace)
No, you're absolutely right. No evidence that those officers had been in Israel, it would be very expensive and tricky to send the Minneapolis police force abroad. In today's world you do come across 'cascading' where key people are sent for training and then share the benefits of their new skills with their colleagues.
The Police in the US have been torturing suspects and innocents for decades and decades, if anything, if you wanted to learn about the maltreatment of prisoners, I'd be sending troops to the Chicago PD rather than to the IDF
Jon Burge- Torturer in chief...
it is interesting to see how people will stick up for a state on the grounds of 'anti-racism' or 'anti-anti-semitism' and in that country:
* like the 1927 Immorality Act in South Africa, 'inter-marriage' is illegal
* the President refers to refugees as 'infiltrators', and he's not being ironic
* the Chief Rabbi refers to Africans as monkeys
* communities can vote on racial purity and who they'll let live in the houses
a temporary Covid hospital in Gaza was destroyed because it hadn't been granted 'permission'
a temproary hospital was built in the Golan Heights for ISIS fighters since they were fighting Iranian backed forces
* Desmond Tutu said the Israeli treatment of the Palestinians was worse that the treatment of blacks under SA apartheid.
I had to do a double take on Nick's post. I once got a John Burghe to speak to my students, but he was a jewish refugee from the Nazis and had been head of the Arts Council. Bit different.
Ooops.
Think I just wandered into a thread about US Police.... thought it was the Keir Starmer one.....
Any way... any one else notice how the media is subtlety changing the reporting around him.
IMHO , started off as he couldn’t do anything wrong but now seems that they are keen to point more flaws....
Long bailey being an example
Originally great that he would take action around anti- semitism ( which was needed )
Now, still great that he did something, but not great as it could cost votes 🤔, as he didn’t do enough or sooner
The actuality’s seem irrelevant to a section of the press ( as always )
Yes Isreal is a disgusting apartheid state in effect and critism of Isreal is not anti semitism
However for RLB to retweet that is at best incredibly dimwitted. Refusing to apologise or delete it but doubling down instead is stupid and the idea that US police get their deadly action from training from the israeli police is certainly far too close to an antisemetic trope.
Do I think RLB is an antisemite - the jury is out. do I think she proved herself unworthy of a shadow cabinet seat? without doubt
RLB is certainly no sharp cookie but she's not alone. Jess Phillips on the front bench?
To criticise Israel is a conspiracy against jews?
it is interesting to see how people will stick up for a state on the grounds of ‘anti-racism’ or ‘anti-anti-semitism’
I don’t think anyone is ‘sticking up for’ what the Israeli government does and has done, we are pointing out that if your take on recent racist killings by police in the USA is ‘look to Israel’, then you are perpetuating conspiracy theories about subjugation based on race in the USA being down to the Jews. If when someone refuses to apologise for spreading conspiracy theories like that, your response is “you can’t even criticise Israel these days”, you are wrong, and you are part of the problem. You can criticise Israel. You can criticise its government. [ I would advise making a distinction between the two though ]. All the worlds ills do not however lead to Israel.
Whoever suggested that? All we're doing here is trying to unpick what evidence is available.
You did 4 posts above
Yes Isreal is a disgusting apartheid state in effect and critism of Isreal is not anti semitism
Hmmm, One could make a pretty good case against the accusation of Israel being apartheid, as strictly speaking it isn't. (it's laws and so on don't recognise any difference in skin colour or race for example), and denial of a Jewish state on the grounds that it is by definition apartheid is probably anti-Semitic. It's clearly paradoxical.
This isn't the thread for it though, and we should stop discussing it here.
Not at all. All I was pointing out was the irony of claiming that to criticise Israel is to criticise jews, the definition of anti-semitism that Corbyn signed up to, leads otherwise anti-racist people to defend an apartheid state. Trying to put words into people's mouths is exactly what a trope is.
it’s laws and so on don’t recognise any difference in skin colour or race for example),
I'd say The Law of Return certainly does !
And TBF the quote was that 'in effect' it is , which you could certainly argue re land rights, security
None of this detracts from RLB being an idiot for posting the article
One could make a pretty good case against the accusation of Israel being apartheid, as strictly speaking it isn’t. (it’s laws and so on don’t recognise any difference in skin colour or race for example),
Aside from the fact that many consider Judaism to be an ethnicity, apartheid means "segregation" and is therefore not limited to skin colour or race. Given that the Israeli constitution clearly gives supremacy to Jewish people, how else would you describe it?
Can we have all the critique of Israeli law and governance in another thread?
You can criticise Israel.
You can as long as you're prepared to be seen as an anti-semite or a racist. I don't much care what people think of me but it's a fact that I've recently refrained from discussing Israeli policy towards the Palestinians either here or in real life for this very reason. On the rare occasions I do I try extremely hard to qualify everything as a comment on Israeli government policy but it's never quite enough. It's another result of culture war politics. If you can't win or engage with the argument, go straight to name-calling and abusive stereotypes. And we wonder why everything is going to shit.
...and to bring it slightly back on topic, that's why I don't think Starmer has made a good decision on this. He's so far done a very good job of bringing back rational and informed debate as a thing to aim for, but this just plays to culture war sensibilities which won't do him or labour any favours because they can't win the culture war.
I'd suggest starting a new thread about Israel.
The point here is that that linking Israel to a brutal murder in the US is dog-whistle anti semitism. RLB should have seen this. Starmer was right to act, so we're having this discussion after rather than before her inevitable sacking.
Possibly Peake didn't know she'd blown that whistle, but whatever...
Is this an anti-Semitic headline?
No
Is this an anti-Semitic headline?
No because it's in relation to the tories, not labour. That's exactly the point I'm trying to make.
@dazh - so if it had been a Labour figure, not honest Bob, you think the headline would have been anti-Semitic? Really?
Dazh has a point. antisemitism has been used as a stick to beat Labour with despite far more prevalent racism in the tories
Agreed, but that's not what his previous post says. And all the more reason not to hand anyone the stick.
so if it had been a Labour figure
Not quite the point I was (clumsily, addmittedly) making, which was that if someone on the left of the labour party was highlighting the dealings of corrupt Israelis, they'd probably be accused of anti-semitism in some form.
kelvin
Subscriber
Can we have all the critique of Israeli law and governance in another thread?
Indeed, a lot of whataboutery
None of which detracts from RLB being foolish tweeting that article, refusing to remove it & giving Starmer no choice but to sack her.
Are you still defending the original article, and the sharing of it? Why? RLB should have apologised, and made it clear that the central concerns of the BLM campaigners has NOTHING to do with Israel. It’s not hard. She had to lose her post. Claiming there was nothing anti-Semitic about falsely linking racist killings in the USA to Israel is utterly tone death. You really should stop.
Dazh has a point. antisemitism has been used as a stick to beat Labour with despite far more prevalent racism in the tories
That is the point & why RLB should've thought before posting
It's not really whataboutery, Starmer acted big time on one definition of anti-semititism and so we need to ask what does it mean to be anti-semitic? Corbyn got abused on this issue, it is fairly central to the evolution of the LP under Starmer.
Labour politicians are currently held to higher standards. That is not fair, but can not be ignored … not least because so many of their followers jump on and propagate anti-Semitic tropes on social media. Politicans have to play their part in putting a stop to that. The particular lie at the heart of this issue is currently being repeated, and added to, by thousands of people who claim to be aligned with RLB, thinking they are backing her up. She needs to act to distance herself from all that, and try and stop the lie spreading further.
Are you still defending the original article, and the sharing of it?
If you look back through my posts you'll see I've never defended RLB. I don't much like RLB, and think she's a poor flag-holder for the left. My concern around Starmers decision to sack her is to do with the issues around labour unity, the anti-semitism issue and culture war politics rather than RLB's stupidity. I'm still not jumping on the Keir-is-a-tory bandwagon, but he needs to very careful as labour members and activists will only take so much. If he goes down the purge the lefties route as many here want, he may beat them, but he won't win the next election.
I think most of us want him to purge the idiots not the lefties.
I think most of us want him to purge the idiots not the lefties.
A slight problem with that Tj is that you call nearly everyone idiots. To be called an idiot nowadays all you need, is to be in disagreement with the person calling you one. The path to a better World is not difficult, perhaps we’re better off with idiots with the right intentions, than all those super smart, Elton types presently running the country.
I think most of us want him to purge the idiots not the lefties.
Define idiot. What labour need is an alliance of the professional, managerialist, PR-savvy elements of the party, and the passionate campaigners who form the ideological backbone. I don't think many on the left would disagree that they aren't very good at modern media and PR management, but there has to be a recognition that it isn't the only thing required. There needs to be some radicalism at policy level which seeks to really change things, and there's not much evidence of that right now. Ultimately if he follows the blairite path as expressed by Binners et al, he'll be no more successful than Miliband was. He can't beat the tories without the left.
The party membership of the politician involved is not relevant to the question I'm asking.
Is the headline itself anti-Semitic?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jun/25/robert-jenrick-faces-questions-over-meeting-with-israeli-mining-heir
The party membership of the politician involved is not relevant to the question in asking. Is the headline anti-Semitic?
No, as everyone's said. Start another thread if you want a more detailed explanation, though I'll not be bothering. This is about Starmner.
@dazh: So what should he have done with RLB?
But by referring unnecessarily to the nationality of the businessman in that particular story, does it not allude to one of the oldest and most unpleasant tropes perpetrated against the Jewish people?
But by referring unnecessarily to the nationality of the businessman in that particular story, does it not allude to one of the oldest and most unpleasant tropes perpetrated against the Jewish people?
I'm pretty sure his nationality would've been referred to regardless of where he was from.
But by referring unnecessarily to the nationality of the businessman in that particular story, does it not allude to one of the oldest and most unpleasant tropes perpetrated against the Jewish people?
What point do you want to make about Starner?
So what should he have done with RLB?
A firm public rebuke would have been proportionate I think. It may not have been the most politically opportunist solution but there are bigger things to consider than just the anti-semitism issue. There's fault on both sides, but it's his job to unify not start new battles. I think the left want to support him and want him to win, but they're not going to roll over like they did in the 90s.
My concern around Starmers decision to sack her is to do with the issues around labour unity, the anti-semitism issue and culture war politics rather than RLB’s stupidity.
It was for RLB to shut down the story, apologise for sharing the nonsense in the article, and shut down the spreading of the trope by those who support her by making it clear it is wrong and unacceptable. Without that, the damage is unstoppable. The party leader has chosen the right action in the light of that, but there is no way he can stop it being damaging. Only RLB could have limited the damage.
From an outside view, Miliband failed rightly or wrongly he came across like a big dufus rather than what 'faction' of Labour he was closest too.
Starmer I think correctly is very conscious of having loose cannons on his front bench who could inadvertently blurt things out handing the press and the tories all the ammo they need.
A firm public rebuke would have been proportionate I think
Fair enough, so we're disagreeing on severity rather than principle. That was actually my first reaction too.
What point do you want to make about Starner?
I'm suggesting there's a legitimate debate to be had about whether the comment that triggered the action by Starmer was actually anti-Semitic. A number of people in the thread seem to be suggesting the answer is so obvious that no discussion is necessary.
It is obvious. You can’t take an age old anti-Semitic trope, substitute in “Israel” for “Jews”, and think that makes it okay. The racist killings by Police in the USA are not down to Israel in any way. Israel is not behind the subjection based on race in the USA now, just as they were not behind the slave trade. Stamp on those tropes, even if people you like and agree with mistakenly spread them. Apologise if you mistakenly spread them, or lead to the spreading of them, yourself. Do it wholeheartedly and clearly, don’t try and claim that they are not anti-Semitic instead of addressing and stopping the tropes when you have the platform to do so.
I’m suggesting there’s a legitimate debate to be had about whether the comment that triggered the action by Starmer was actually anti-Semitic.
That 'debate' is further up the thread. Conclusion: baselessly linking Israel to a murder in the US is what antisemites would do, so probably best avoided by a shadow minister.
