Printable View
I can't say I have noticed any intentionally antisemitic language. I have noticed some clumsy tropes, mostly by LOM, but nothing malicious. As usual with allegations, the burden of proof is on the accuser. Go on.Quote:
Originally Posted by RonnieBird
No, it's not a criminal trial. The test is public opinion and especially the opinion of the victims.
The more anyone tries to talk their way around the issue rather than addressing it, the more they alienate objective opinion.
I am not talking about anything in the mainstream that might affect the outcome of the election. I am asking you to back up your claim that people in this thread and on this board more generally are antisemitic with evidence.Quote:
Originally Posted by RonnieBird
No, I think I specifically said both you and Trampie ,for example , aren't anti Semitic . Even tobw isn't anti Semitic.
I honestly didn't think anyone here might be anti Semitic , but if you read over the posts, two people have ticked some boxes which are very worrying.
When we hear someone use the term " your sort" , that's really not good. When someone says that someone Jewish can't
be " ethnically English ", ( whatever that means) , that's spelling it out.
That's a surprising by product of the thread,which is about the effect on labour of not addressing the subject properly. I fully admit that I was very shocked to hear it here at my club and to hear it from people claiming to represent labour , because I'd thought it was more a case of being thoughtless than intentional ,( which it mainly is). However , although I still don't think it's widespread , I'm now convinced that some actually are motivated by plain race hate, and that REALLY should be challenged.
You really have been challenged. unfortunately you seem incapable of understanding or taking notice. I am still waiting for you to accept that approving comments on the George Soros conspiracy theories (and his mindless dupes) references is not clever; nor is constantly and uncritically endorsing apartheid/racist policies; equating the allegiances and interests of British Jewish people with those of the Israeli state; downplaying or dismissing the racism experienced by people other than Jews; and demonising lifelong anti-racist campaigners who oppose the political ideology of Zionism. Your posts never engage with the facts or the ideas behind these things. You just troll the board and throw out abuse against other posters whilst managing to be patronising, self-satisfied and boorish all at the same time.Quote:
Originally Posted by RonnieBird
I assume from some of your recent posts (and through a process of elimination) that the two posters you have decided are anti-semitic are Dorcus and me. Me because I oppose the Zionist ideology that underpins the Israeli state and have argued that some of the allegations made against Labour are false or exaggerated (whilst others are justified) and that in part this is a campaign against Corbyn and the Palestine solidarity movement (especially BDS)?
Is that it? If so i repeat my earlier comment on you: You really are apiece of work! I don't want you to misunderstand that expression again, so he is a definistion:
.... a piece of work is also used as an idiom to describe someone who is unpleasant, dishonest, hard to deal with, of low character.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...s_of_zion.html
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-49584157
Once again , I wish you could make a point without the name calling. That's a little clue in itself of course.
Anyway, I'm very confused by this stuff you're saying - and said before- that I defend apartheid and various racism. I don't think I do really. You've also mentioned George Soros before... No I don't like him or the things he tries to do but I don't understand why that somehow makes me the bad guy . Maybe you could explain the logic of that ?
Since I never named the culprits, why do you think people might think you and Dorcus might be anti Semites ?
I don't think 'people' think that. Quite the opposite. I assumed you thought that - or rather thought it would be an insinuation that would get you bites. And you were right - I bit.Quote:
Originally Posted by RonnieBird
If you ever want a grown up discussion about: Israel and its' laws and policies towards Israeli and Palestinian arabs; the British anti-racist tradition; the various strands of Zionism (which I admit causes me some trouble - not all Zionists think the same); the case for and against BDS; the use and abuse of anti-semitic tropes; the rising number of anti-semitic attacks (physical as well as verbal) in Europe and North America; why Islamophobia is racism, cases in Labour which illustrate the existence of anti-semitic views but other cases that show false or distorted claims have been made; the real fears that have been stoked in the British Jewish community - though some experiences but mainly through a press campaign; the slow death of a two state solution to the Israel/Palestine conflict and what alternatives remain; the role of social media in all this.... any of that stuff, I am happy to discuss and debate those issues.
But you won't. You will carry on with your alt right diatribes. You will carry on labelling socialists as Nazis. You will carry on with your claims that the Labour Party is planning a new holocaust (that really is what you have been saying!). You will carry on deflecting and avoiding facts and evidence. You will carry on with those strange boasts about your supposed connections or influence and you will carry on being bewildered that no one is impressed. You will carry on trolling.
I thought for a moment there that you were going to post something without any name calling, but you did it right at the end.
All that stuff about Israel is interesting but it should be a separate thread - maybe I'll start one.
It's very unwise to qualify disapproval of racism in the political world, which labour has somewhat done. You are also doing it, which isn't as electorally destructive because we presume that it's your personal opinion. Nonetheless , you're doing them no favours even with this small audience.
I haven't said that Labour are planning a new holocaust , ( theyd **** it up like everything else if they did ), but that they're inflaming the same prejudices in the same groups which led to the last one.
You say that there's some technical difference between other socialists and Nazis , and there may be, but to all practical purposes it's much the same thing. It's theoretical nonsense born of envy and revenge which can't work and never has worked, but usually results in incrementally more insane and inhuman cruelties until someone puts a stop to it.
The bottom line is that they both disregard the individual human being as anything else but a cog in the machine of an all powerful state which promises a better world but only produces misery, starvation and desolation.
There we are, there's the sensible discussion you invited -perhaps we should have yet another thread about why anyone still thinks socialism might work next time despite the 100% record of failures so far and the millions of human beings it has killed through violence and starvation.
Dont be silly soclaism doesn't cause death, only the Tories do, according to JC .Quote:
Originally Posted by RonnieBird
Old Maduro the Venezuelan socialist will explain things better he keeps funeral directors well busy.
If you listen to the two apologists for inaction on anti semitism here, it's all just nonsense - those Jews making a fuss about nothing or some mad idea I dreamed up on my own to interfere with their vision of a soviet style paradise, but once again a major figure has spoken out and the Times will lead tomorrow on the strong opinions expressed in an article by the Chief Rabbi.
He's a very brave man in my opinion, because he knows perfectly well that if Corbyn were to gain power there could be serious repercussions against him personally.
We must pray that that never happens, but be ready to defend those who would first be singled out.
Labour keep on insisting there isn't a problem with antiSemitism in the party these days, but it just won't go away - that has to be a damaging intervention by the Chief Rabbi for them. I suspect this and a position on Brexit by its leader that could be called honourable in some respects, but seems impractical to me in the current political situation is costing them this election.
I agree with most of that, although Labour do not insist there is no problem. They do (mostly) insist that they are dealing with it through disciplinary action and education, and that other parties have more of a problem but are not doing anything about it or being held to account.Quote:
Originally Posted by the other bob wilson
Both anti-semitism and Brexit will hurt Labour electorally. I expect the impact of Corbyn personally taking a neutral stance on a second Brexit referendum will reduce as we get closer to polling day - the bullet has already been fired and he now has his script sorted out - but there will be a steady stream of anti-semitism attacks getting front page coverage up until the end.
Its the right wing media crapping themselves that corbyn is doing well and far better than expected that has provoked this nonsenseQuote:
Originally Posted by jon1959
Corbyn isn't anti Jew , which is what this stupid pompous rabbi and the Tory times are suggesting , he's anti Zionist and pro Palestinian , like many on the left
The times are shitting themselves that the polls and tightening and this rabbi is more than happy to stir the pot as it suits his agenda of Israel standing alone against the pesky Arabs whilst we steal their land
There are many Jewish anti Zionist labour party members , I tend to listen to them not the right wing press
The conservative party is full of right wing nutters who don't like Jews , let's see the times report on them
I've just listened to a previously Labour voting leader of the Jewish community being interviewed on Radio 5 and he said that representatives of that community had a meeting with Jeremy Corbyn on 24 April 2018 which went pretty well, but they have heard nothing from him and his party since despite what he said was a commitment to a further meeting within three months - if that is true, then I find it amazing in the current climate.Quote:
Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY
Its the right wing media crapping themselves that corbyn is doing well and far better than expected that has provoked this nonsenseQuote:
Originally Posted by jon1959
Corbyn isn't anti Jew , which is what this stupid pompous rabbi and the Tory times are suggesting , he's anti Zionist and pro Palestinian , like many on the left
The times are shitting themselves that the polls and tightening and this rabbi is more than happy to stir the pot as it suits his agenda of Israel standing alone against the pesky Arabs whilst we steal their land
There are many Jewish anti Zionist labour party members , I tend to listen to them not the right wing press
The conservative party is full of right wing nutters who don't like Jews , let's see the times report on them
The Tories promised 200000 new homes in the social rented sector in 2017Quote:
Originally Posted by the other bob wilson
They have actually built just over 2000
Politics is full of he said , she said , this latest splurge on corbyn from the Tory voting Jewish lobby is blatent electioneering , being pushed by the conservative controlled times and ironically given its support for Hitler , the daily mail
The Jewish population is being used as a political football
Why hasn't there been an outcry about the blatent islamaphobia in the Tory party ?
I tell you why , the Tory press won't cover it
In other parties complaints of racism are taken seriously and acted upon. I posted in this thread about a week back that a candidate for another party was revealed to have sent a racist tweet and suspended by lunchtime.
That's the difference you see.
Jon says that Corbyn has taken a neutral stance on Brexit , but the fact is that he's also taken a neutral stance on anti semitism complaints. That's very worrying when he doesn't take a neutral stance on Palestine, sharing a platform with terrorists who openly celebrate the holocaust and call for the slaughter of every Jewish man, woman and child. He welcomes them to events and calls them "friends".
These are facts.
Perhaps it's a question of ignorance. Maybe some people here are accepting the George Galloway version of lovely reasonable Palestinian groups who are constantly oppressed by Israel and have nowhere to turn. Perhaps they don't know that these people will not accept any civilised negotiations or concessions , insisting upon a total jihad including endless street attacks on civilians and kids and calling for the death of all Jews ?
They do exactly the same sort of attacks as we've seen here and in Europe, but they do them more often and fire Iranian missiles at Israeli schools on a daily basis.
It is quite routine for them to display pictures of Adolf Hitler and swastikas on placards and distribute leaflets in Arabic about
Aushwitz being " the only answer".
Well that's one thing. It's not nice, but when we see Corbyn shaking their hands, calling them " brothers" and "friends" and refusing to condemn such behaviour, what are we to think ?
If that is true it is a major mistake by Labour. There needs to be more talking, not less.Quote:
Originally Posted by the other bob wilson
I think this fairly recent piece by Peter Hain and Daniel Levy has been linked before, but it is worth a (re)read as an attempt to understand what is going on and suggest a route forward. I don't agree with all of it (some statements don't match my experience) and I doubt there will be the space and goodwill needed to make it happen, but at least it is a thoughtful and comprehensive contribution.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/ope...e-way-forward/
That's a long rambling essay. Lots of words, no action.
Tell me John, what rights do you want for the swastika waving jihadists ? Corbyn's "friends" and "brothers" ?
They have the same rights as anyone else and whenever their territorial demands are met they use the land they're given to launch rockets and as a terrorist base.
They clearly state that they want to kill all Jews - is this a "right" they should have ?
The leader of the conservative party referred to Muslim women as looking like letter boxes and has never shown remorse or apologised for that popular racist dog whistle. If Corbyn wrote an article about Jewish people and said 'har har they have big noses don't they?', we would never hear the end of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by RonnieBird
Also you aren't comparing apples with apples, how a party acts towards these incidents during an election campaign is going to be different to how they react at other times.
Very out of context quote from BoJo whilst he was defending the right of Moslem women to wear that stuff, but I'm not here to defend what he might or might not have said.
One thing you can definitely do is tell Jewish jokes - Jewish people do it all the time.
Jewish people sometimes wear a hat called a Kippah, and no one minds when other people call them frisbees, because that's just a bit of humour. Of course , some people manage to use it in a nasty way, ( as has been done on this thread), by calling Jewish people "Kippers" and daubing it on synagogue doors.
That's not the point anyway. Jokes are one thing, calling those who support Hitler and the holocaust " freinds" and " brothers" is something else isn't it ?
The bottom line is that Jewish people - who have some experience - increasingly detect the early signs of a dangerous persecution. It's all very well them denying it, but the plain fact is that people don't believe it. There are just too many examples to ignore it
You aren't here to defend him but you managed it anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by RonnieBird
You realise Jewish people aren't naturally different to the rest of us, don't you? They don't have an inbuilt holocaust alarm.
One Jewish guy on the news just described labour as a 'wholly antisemitic party'. Do you think that quote is an exaggeration?
Ultimately, what we have seen is a day devoid of policy discussion. Instead we are focusing on character attacks of little substance from all directions.
No, I don't think it's an exaggeration. In fact Corbyn is just being destroyed by Andrew Neil on the TV and after three requests refuses to apologise for anti semitism in his party.
Although the vast majority of the Labour Party isn't anti Semitic , I think he is honestly - based on his close association with those who openly say they want to kill all Jews and refusal to condemn them. As long as he's calling the shots and refusing to address the issue, the party is therefore in practical terms " wholly anti Semitic" .
My opinion - there are very very many decent people in that party and they should cast this man adrift if he can't convincingly reject anti semitism. Perhaps he got this far in through naivety rather than evil on his part , but I'm afraid it's a taint which cannot be removed at this stage. He is toxic to that party and if he cares about it he should make way for someone who can be trusted
He could have put this to bed tonight, a slight upsurge in "the polls" leading into this, he failed miserably and he will again get hammered in the press for his refusal, Johnson refused the other night, what a pair of clowns to pick from, it's the UK version of Trump and the Hilderbeast. :facepalm:Quote:
Originally Posted by RonnieBird
Do I need to tell you what the word 'wholly' means? That was the point of my question about the quote. I respect the views of many Jewish people, not those spouting nonsense like that though. I wouldn't respect it from anybody else and neither would you if you weren't trying to force your point through.Quote:
Originally Posted by RonnieBird
In what universe was Corbyn going to have a good night? This was always going to be damage limitation and hope nobody is watching. I just hope Neil can keep up the pressure and even handed across the weak because the rest of them have just as many holes, I think he will because despite his obvious political leanings he relishes the fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nelsonca61
No doubt though, Corbyn should have just apologised but for some reason they don't, it must be political strategy 101, ever since Clegg did and people made memes and joke songs out of it barely anybody important has every said the s word.
He won't apologise because he's not sorry.
He knows he can't admit how he feels toward Jewish people ,but in his own mad mind it's justified and nothing to aplogise about.
In any case, we'll see how all that plays out for him.
https://youtu.be/P3d4xgvAdC8
When Neil scents blood I don't think it matters which party the interviewee is in!Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Cartman
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nelsonca61
Not seen the interview but listened to clips of it on the way home from the game last night and that is exactly how I felt - it seems to me that it would have been very good for his party politically if Corbyn had simply replied "yes I do" the first time Neil asked him if he would apologise before going on to give a more detailed answer. To me it seems such a small step to move from what he did say to what Neil was asking if he would say.
There have been a few posters who have presented a balanced and persuasive defence of Labour in this thread in the face of some of the ludicrous allegations made by the person who started it. They are more clued in to this subject from a Labour point of view than I am, so can I ask them why do you think Corbyn would not apologise last night?
I want Labour to stop a majority Conservative Government being elected and would be a dead cert to vote for them under different circumstances, but this is one of a couple of issues which is making me reluctant to do so - to me, Corbyn made that majority Conservative Government a more realistic proposition last night, why would he want to do that?
He wouldn't want to do it but he got caught and he doesn't know what to say. He won't apologise because he's not sorry
I haven't seen the interview either Paul - like you just heard a few clips (and seen the press front pages!). I have also seen a number of comments by people close to Corbyn that he should have apologised when Neil first put it to him. I don't know why he responded as he did but I suspect it was a reluctance to give full credence to the Chief Rabbi's attack. A part of the Chief Rabbi's letter to the Times is fair, but most of it is not - as Alf Dubs said so clearly. The experience is that line-drawing hasn't been effective. The more Labour concedes and apologises (when it does it for tactical reasons not because an apology is justified) the more the attacks are ramped up as happened with the IHRA definition and the feeding frenzy gets worse. It would never be 'put to bed'.Quote:
Originally Posted by the other bob wilson
I may be wrong but I think Corbyn (and certainly many members of the shadow cabinet and NEC) have apologised in the past for the incidents of anti-semitism uncovered, but have done it in the context of a push back on some of the false or exaggerated claims that are in the media mix and feed the public perception. I have been (and still am) critical of Corbyn for a weak response to the whole situation. He avoids conflict all the time which means he has been weak in defending Labour against unjustified attacks and weak in dealing with the real cases. Some of that is because of internal processes that took time to change, but he could have been more decisive and clear in his public statements at an earlier stage. On that point I agree with the Chief Rabbi.
In my opinion Corbyn would have been slaughtered by most of the press this morning whatever he said in response to Neil on this. He either refuses to agree with the Chief Rabbi in which case he is 'in denial' or he does apologise in response to the Chief Rabbi's letter and Neil's challenge, in which case he implicitly accepts everything in the letter, no matter if he tries to qualify it later.
If you're interested the Jewish Voice For Labour has produced an election briefing note on some of the big issues and events in the anti-semitism crisis. It is swamped by the deluge of attack pieces in the national and community press but maybe some of it will get a hearing.
https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org...ent/rebuttals/
Quote:
Originally Posted by jon1959
No. He's just doing exactly what you're doing, defending the indefensible !
Thanks Jon, I read the document and it does give alternative viewpoints that you just don't get to see in the current reporting of this issue. I also think you may be right about Corbyn getting slaughtered whatever he said. However, and I'm probably showing my naivety here, I've always held the morals and values I learned as a child as being very important in life and I believe that, as much as he could do in the current position, Corbyn would have been holding the moral high ground if he had apologised when asked (especially as he has done it before it seems).Quote:
Originally Posted by jon1959
Yes, it would not have stopped the rabid right elements of the national press from attacking him, but, in this age of social media, I think there could have been a groundswell of support from "ordinary folk" who had witnessed the very novel sight of a leading politician admitting that they had got something wrong - also, I still believe that tactically that would have been better for him than sticking to the line that he did.
I've thought quite a bit about both the Rabbi's statement and the Andrew Neil interview with Corbyn.Quote:
Originally Posted by the other bob wilson
Firstly, I appreciate not everyone might agree with this but I think the Rabbi went far beyond what is acceptable in his condemnation of Corbyn. It's ok for him to declare that British Jews in general have reservations and even anxieties about the party and the leadership and it's ok for him to make that known to the general public in his capacity as spiritual leader of British Jewry. However I though it a step too far when he intervened politically and recommended people not to vote for Labour. Apart from the myriad dangers of a Tory majority, on the question of racism/religious prejudice is he not in effect saying vote for any other party but Labour which he knows all too well given our political system will guarantee a Tory majority. He must be aware of the rampant and institutional Islamophobia in the Tory party so is he in effect saying, naively perhaps, do not vote Labour, end up with a Tory government and us Jews will be safe while all the persecution is passed on to the Muslims? I'm sure he didn't mean to infer this but in his clumsy and biased way I think that is a message that is forming.
I understand your dilemma in regard your voting intentions but one thing I am absolutely rock solid sure about is that Corbyn does not have a racist bone in his body. Andrew Neil is a tough cookie and his interview yesterday was typically challenging. On the face of it a Corbyn apology was set up to be the right thing to do. Jon59 appears to have a lot more knowledge and experience than I do on the internal machinations of the Labour party but I put forward two possible reasons Corbyn did not apologize on air.
1. There is an impending EHRC investigation and he didn't want to prejudice anything because some things might be submissive at this stage.
2. More broadly, there is a problem with some aspects of the anti-Semitic definition with direct relevance to the Labour Party and Socialists on general. At the heart of it all is that Labour is a party which always takes the side of the underdog ( just like it did in embracing British Jewry on their hour of need) and Zionism on its practical application of creating second class citizens of the Palestine people and the stealthy land grab will always be anathema to Labour values. More and more the Jews want to stretch the envelope by trying to make any criticism of Israeli policy and Zionism an attack on their race and religion and slowly increasing the definitions of anti- seminism to close down criticism altogether. If Corbyn apologized I think his view we could be entering dangerous territory where legitimate criticism of Zionism could be off limits and in which case the Palestine people would be abandoned to the wolves.
Bloody Corrective Text: apart from bthe other typos "submissive" should read "subjudice'
Racism is rife in the Tory party and as you say the rabbi failed to condemn the blatent attacks on Muslims by conservative party members
The rabbi was totally out of order and totally Tory , hopefully the thousands of moderate left leaning Jewish people won't be swayed by this nonsense
Can you imagine the outcry is the Muslim council called on all Muslims to vote labour as the Tory party was inherently islamaphobic ?
The Sun and Daily Mail would have a field day