Labour Party problems

As David Duke is full of praise for Team Corbyn:

Good one there Cranberry, nothing really happening, no news going on but your still banging them in there. Got nothing better to do or is your social media feed full of anti corbyn shite?

According to Peston it appears that Jeremy is set to accept IHRA.

 “But there is a but. There may be addendums, put into the rulebook, which weaken the force of the IHRA examples”

Peston goes on to say that “What is striking is that Jon Lansman, the founder of Momentum and the activist who used to be seen as the most ardent of Corbynistas, is said to be fighting to prevent the least possible dilution of the IHRA examples.

So what will the right wingers have to move onto or will they just dissect every historic statement made?

.

It doesn’t actually require much for the Blairite wing to get up a head of steam of outrage, witness the latest lamentings of Emily Benn

@ Drj – What has Emily lamented?

@ Drj – What has Emily lamented?

enough to make her father turn in his grave…

An ex Rabbi now wades into the anti semitism row…..

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45333268

Rather strong words from Jonathan Sacks, although some of his views on other subjects has been questionable.

Well hi did do that this morning, isn’t this on the same stuff we already covered?

Also from the video of the speech [1] it’s seems he was talking about two specific Zionists, not Zionists in general. So really a non-story. Plus what he went on to say wasn’t especially extreme, just waffling on about history a bit. (Which I approve of!)

From another poster on the last page, do you think the person reacting saw it all or just figured he could react and assume nobody would bother to look?

Who has been setting the reminders and prodding these people into action and nice intervals?

Also from the video of the speech [1] it’s seems he was talking about two specific Zionists, not Zionists in general. So really a non-story. Plus what he went on to say wasn’t especially extreme, just waffling on about history a bit. (Which I approve of!)

I wrote that but I’ve changed my mind this morning, I was focussing on the wrong words.

I should have focussed on: “having lived in this country for a very long time, probably all their lives, they don’t understand English irony”.

Sacks is right when he says:

“it undermines the existence of an entire group of British citizens by depicting them as essentially alien.”

It would be racist (and bloody rude) to say to a (for instance) person of Pakistani origin “You’ve been here all your life and you still don’t get Britain.”. It would be clearly saying “You’re different to ‘us’.”

So  is not quite up there with “Rivers of blood”, but Corbyn’s words are racist and are beyond what’s acceptable in a liberal society.

Breaking news.

Jezza doesn’t like certain people

The New Statesman in a RW propgananda machine ironically sponsored by Russians

Neither earth shattering although the second is a bit of a revelation

The NS has moved rightwards quite considerably, many of its writers if not most are of the anti-Corbyn persuasion for political or cultural reasons.

I never thought I’d find myself defending the beardy messiah, but to compare Corbyns comments with the Enoch Powell ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech is absolutely ludicrous! In fact, it’s actually embarrassing, not to mention counterproductive, for someone like Johnathan Sacks, who should know better, to be making such patently ridiculous remarks.

I don’t think Corbyn is personally antisemitic. But i do think that a lot of people now in the labour party, who are staunch Corbyn Supporters are. And Jezza is simply doing what he always does… endless procrastination and indecision and is happy to let things slide and turn a blind eye when its a certain group of allies and supporters who are doing and saying stuff.

It’s just indicative of his ‘leadership qualities’ generally

Not common sense ones?

this bias is getting quite severe isn’t it if we can’t even trust the NS. What’s the world coming to?

I think you’ll find the term ‘common sense’ is generally used to mean ‘what I think’. Why would you ‘trust’ any journal unless it’s peer reviewed, journals’ positions move around all the time and the world has always been like that.

I think we can write many jews & certainly any zionists off as labour voters at the next election

however aggregate polls show that Labour’s support has not been effected recently

Most recent voting intentions:

Con +1: Opinium (17 Aug)
Lab +3: Deltapoll (16 Aug)
Con +3: YouGov (14 Aug)
Con +1: Kantar/TNS (13 Aug)
Lab +1: ICM (05 Aug)https://t.co/spVpGNDx06 pic.twitter.com/DVs49lz5i6

— Britain Elects (@britainelects) August 21, 2018

however aggregate polls show that Labour’s support has not been effected recently

Probably because the average voter doesn’t care about internal anti-semitism issues.  As for the jewish voter, there are not that many of them and of that not many most are Tory so not really much to lose there.

The media can bang on about it all day but it clearly isn’t working.  The longer they stick with it the more bored people will get of it so let them carry on for a few more years.  Maybe they are running low on BS to spread

Sacks is right when he says:

“it undermines the existence of an entire group of British citizens by depicting them as essentially alien.”

Cobblers. JC was making a comparison between the Palestinian ambassadors command of idiom, irony, whatever, and the apparent lack of understanding on the part of the Zionist listeners.

It seems to be a common tactic to berate someone for saying something which they haven’t actually said (eg pretending someone criticised Jews in general when they actually criticised Israel killing children). That’s a jolly fine debating tactic, but it does leave you open to the charge that your understanding of the language is defective.

Sacks is right when he says:

“it undermines the existence of an entire group of British citizens by depicting them as essentially alien.”

Irony alert! Israel has recently passed a law saying that only its Jews have the right to determination. We used to call that apartheid.

Irony alert! Israel has recently passed a law saying that only its Jews have the right to determination. We used to call that apartheid.

Maybe they think that it’s better that way because “having lived in the country for a very long time, probably all their lives, some non-Jews don’t understand Israel properly”.

See why it’s an unacceptable thing to say in a liberal democracy?

When you foster a them-us attitude bad things can happen.

Lucky nobody actually said that, then.

Does “Pro brexit, anti Semitic” fit on a bus? Then after 1 April 2019 (according to some) there could be an alternative mid/centre engine version with “Anti Brexit, pro Semitic” on the side.

When you foster a them-us attitude bad things can happen.

Quite so, which is why we should focus on real rather than manufactured discrimination.

Quite so, which is why we should focus on real rather than manufactured discrimination.

I’m not saying we should focus on it. Merely that it wasn’t acceptable. If you’ve lived in the UK all your life you’re one of us. To pretend some individuals are still outsiders who don’t quite get “us” is wrong. It’s the language of them and us. Would you say that about someone who’s Dad came from Pakistan?

So yup, as racism goes it’s not exactly hanging someone because they’re black, but it *is* racism and he shouldn’t have said it.

Lucky nobody actually said that, then.

He did, you just keep removing the words when you quote: “having lived in this country for a very long time, probably all their lives, they don’t understand English irony”

It’s pretty clear he was talking about a couple of individuals who didn’t originate from the UK.

It’s pretty clear he was talking about a couple of individuals who didn’t originate from the UK.

And being about 2 individuals not a group or population he could be quite right to point out of they seem to be missing or misunderstanding what other people are saying. Especially if people are deliberately misunderstanding things. Of course nobody would be doing that would they.

When you foster a them-us attitude bad things can happen.

Quite so, which is why we should focus on real rather than manufactured discrimination.

Manufactured discrimination?

So are these Labour Party comments by Jeremy are what then?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45077647

https://www.channel4.com/news/labours-anti-semitism-row-jeremy-corbyn-apology

Antisemitism and other forms of racism

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/mar/23/corbyn-criticised-after-backing-artist-behind-antisemitic-mural

And being about 2 individuals not a group or population he could be quite right to point out of they seem to be missing or misunderstanding what other people are saying.

Yes, quite right to point out a misunderstanding. It was only racist because he brought their foreign heritage into it. Specifically by framing it in “them-us” terms:

“having lived in this country for a very long time, probably all their lives, they don’t understand English irony”

So are these Labour Party comments by Jeremy are what then?

What do you think they are? I think that some people are anti-semites, and some of those people are in the Labour party: it’s right that the leadership is attempting to do something about it. But it’s disappointing that so many allow themselves to be played by the racist state of Israel, and friends of the Islamophobic conservative party.

“having lived in this country for a very long time, probably all their lives, they don’t understand English irony”

Ao saying “I’m amazed those **** don’t get irony” would have been more polite?

Honestly I think you are stretching this one a little too far, considering what is deemed acceptable as speach about almost any other religion in the world.

He did, you just keep removing the words when you quote:

Yep, just like you snip the context about the speech given by a non-native English speaker, and Corbyn observing the contrast.

He didn’t say “Zionists are such a such”, still less “Jews are such and such”. He made a pointed remark about some individuals which the usual suspects inside and outside the Labour Party are now using as an excuse to criticise

@ Ransos – The links are showing Labour trying to address and apologise anti semitism in the Party (this is not “manufactured” surely?). However, this has allowed sections of the RW press to seize upon the words and images and use it against the Labour Party.

Can Labour can’t call itself the anti racist party if it isn’t seen to be dealing with allegations of anti semitism within its own members? It seems that some people on here are saying Labour can’t be questioned on anti-semitism and anyone that does might be in a position of allowing “themselves to be played by the racist state of Israel, and friends of the Islamophobic conservative party”. Do you think anti-semitism within Labour should be ignored because other organisations are racist?

Do you think anti-semitism within Labour should be ignored because other organisations are racist?

Not at all but the outrage, media coverage and level of cherry picking of out of context lines is beyond a joke here. It’s part of a well organised anti labour campaign which is sucking people in.

…and seems to have a high degree of momentum too

it’s right that the leadership is attempting to do something about it.

Even in the case of Ken Livingstone? His comments weren’t remotely racist.

considering what is deemed acceptable as speach about almost any other religion in the world.

It’s not acceptable regardless of religion. Would you say to couple of guys who moved here from Pakistan that  “having lived in this country for a very long time, probably all their lives, they don’t understand English irony”?

No, you wouldn’t regardless of their religion.

He made a pointed remark about some individuals

Yes, he did, a remark based on their non-English heritage. We have no idea what country they or their parents originated from or what religion they were. If you’re going to have a pop at someone based on their non-English ancestry you can’t excuse it by saying “Oh there were only two or three of them.”.

I said

it’s right that the leadership is attempting to do something about it.

You said in response

Do you think anti-semitism within Labour should be ignored because other organisations are racist?

Do you have any other questions I’ve already answered?

Quite so, which is why we should focus on real rather than manufactured discrimination.

So you understand the allegations of anti semitism aren’t “manufactured” then?

So you understand the allegations of anti semitism aren’t “manufactured” then?

Some may not be, the constant raking through and isolating single sentences etc Corbyn are manufactured.

I’d like to see them dealt with, in proportion and without constant commentary.

Yes, he did, a remark based on their non-English heritage

Not at all. A remark based on their poor understanding – real or feigned – of the English language.

And let’s not forget who Sacks is –

Here’s what the ex-chief rabbi gets up to when he’s not comparing Corbyn to Enoch Powell

He’s the one who led a march through Palestinian east Jerusalem which Haaretz described as “a gender-segregated, extreme-right, pro-occupation religious carnival of hatred” in which participants chant “Death to the Arabs” and “Al Aqsa will be burned down.”

So I don’t think we need to be too concerned with his moral judgement.