1. Things you need to know about the new ‘Conversations’ PM system:

    a) DO NOT REPLY TO THE NOTIFICATION EMAIL! I get them, not the intended recipient. I get a lot of them and I do not want them! It is just a notification, log into the site and reply from there.

    b) To delete old conversations use the ‘Leave conversation’ option. This is just delete by another name.
    Dismiss Notice

Labour at it again... anti-Semitism... #II

Discussion in 'off topic' started by Stunsworth, Jul 7, 2019.

  1. maxflinn

    maxflinn Bernie Sanders 2020.

    The Labour Party is left-wing, and should not contain within it a group largely made up of Labour MPs (Labour Friends of Israel, and there's currently around 80 MPs in it) dedicated to whitewashing the crimes of the Israeli state by using pro-Israeli propaganda sent to it from the extreme right-wing Likud Party of Israel.

    “The [Israel] Embassy helps us quite a lot. When bad news stories come out about Israel, the embassy sends us information so we can counter it… it’s really helpful. We work very closely together. But a lot of it is behind the scenes.”
    Michael Rubin, LFI.

    Furthermore, LFI states that it supports a two-state solution. But the Likud government of Israel does not. It sees the West Bank including Jerusalem as Israeli land, and is completely opposed to any Palestinian state. These positions are illegal. The Likud charter is criminal.

    So what we have with LFI is a group who rather than works towards peace actually disseminates propaganda, provided to it by Likud, designed to provide diplomatic cover for the ongoing crimes of illegal occupation and colonisation, routine massacres of innocents etc, committed by the Israeli state.

    To think that these same LFI enablers of the crimes of the Israeli state have not been at the forefront of the fabricated smear campaign against Jeremy Corbyn and Labour in general is very naive.
     
  2. Brian

    Brian Eating fat, staying slim

    Possibly you don’t understand politics.

    I’m sure you do understand politics so it’s unclear why you’re banging on about this.

    If this 76 a month had been going for a decade, or even decades you might have a point. Labour is investigating alleged cases. How about you detail what youdemand Labour does that it isn’t doing in response to the media smears?

    I suggest you stop assuming guilt until the crime is proven.

    It’s another subject, but what Willsman said is clearly not anti-semitic. That some claim they believe it is, forcing someone to apologise for something they aren’t guilty of is a stark indicator of why politicians don’t want to answer questions on virtually any subject. There is always some arsehole waiting to put a spin on it.
     
  3. ks.234

    ks.234 pfm Member

    Hi Gassor. I want to avoid getting ‘circular’ here, so don’t want to repeat too much of stuff I’ve already said. However, I’d like to reemphasise that I acknowledge there is an AS problem in Labour, but want to see testable evidence before agreeing that it’s widespread, or institutional, or that Corbyn himself is antisemitic.

    I have heard the clip of Willsman before, and I have to agree that it doesn’t sound good. Willsman is clearly angry and his tone is all wrong. I’ve heard him speak in other situations and again, his tone is one that jars quite horribly. I don’t particularly like the man.

    However, putting my personal feelings to one side, it is not antisemitic to ask for supporting evidence to an allegation which is what Willsman is doing, albeit in a tone that is not helpful to his cause. Also at the end he is asking for a show of hands, which is a stupid thing to do because everyone could put their hand up he would then have no comeback and second, you should never ask a question you don’t already know the answer to in an official procedure.

    Last, but by no means least, in every single hearing I have been involved in, and I’ve been involved in many, the recording of the hearing is strictly forbidden. Also, the contents of the meeting are confidential. So whoever recorded the hearing with Willsman is likely breaking their own code of conduct, and further almost certainly breaking confidentially by then leaking the recording to The Jewish Chronicle. At the very least it shows that someone on the panel had a political axe to grind.

    12 members in 9 months found guilty of AS in a party of hundreds of thousands is certainly 12 too many, but it’s not evidence of institutional racism or that Jeremy Corbyn is antisemitic. Until there is, I’ll reserve judgement.
     
  4. gassor

    gassor There may be more posts after this.

    You need 76 reported instances of racism a month to be going on for over a decade to accept there is problem? Words fail me.

    As for Willsman, I do find his ranting objectionable enough, and many Jewish people seem to agree, for him to be suspended while he is investigated for anti-semitism.
     
    Still likes this.
  5. ks.234

    ks.234 pfm Member

    76 reported cases are not evidence until they’ve been investigated and found to have substance. To presume the 76 accusations as evidence of guilt without due process should alarm anyone with democratic sensibilities. To then go further and assume guilt even after due process has taken place and without any evidence to back up that assumption is found missing or unsubstantial is, well, I’m similarly lost for words....frankly it’s alarming that anyone would be willing to put aside due process and the fundamental principle of innocent until proven guilty whenever it suits their prejudice.

    You being accused of racism does not, on its own, make you a racist. If you want a system in which the accusation on it’s own is sufficient evidence to assume guilt, then that is a system without one of the basic democratic principles.
     
  6. gassor

    gassor There may be more posts after this.

    I have not said all 76 cases a month are all guilty, have I? I have not said an accusation is the same as being found guilty, have I? I have not said due process has to be put aside. have I? I have said all the accusations indicate along with other evidence* suggest there is a problem which needs to be further investigated.

    * In April 2019, the Sunday Times reported that Labour had received 863 complaints against party members, including councillors. The newspaper claimed leaked e-mails it had seen showed more than half of the cases remained unresolved while there had been no investigation in 28% of them. It said fewer than 30 people had been expelled while members investigated for posting online comments such as "Heil Hitler" and "Jews are the problem" had not been suspended.

    * The EHRC announced it would be conducting its own wide-ranging investigation into whether Labour "unlawfully discriminated against, harassed or victimised people because they are Jewish".

    * The Panorama programme etc etc etc.
     
    Still likes this.
  7. cooky1257

    cooky1257 pfm Member

    You imply it though, much in the same way you think Willsman is 'downplaying' AS by asking for evidence as he suspects the hand of the Israeli Embassy..
     
  8. gassor

    gassor There may be more posts after this.

    I am saying that Labour has a case to answer and has not handled the anti-semitism accusations very well. What else you think I imply is up to you.
     
    Still likes this.
  9. Still

    Still he said his naim was ralph

    > multiple incoming denials alert <

    It's this type of doublethink that has got LP into such a mess with the AS problems.
     
  10. cooky1257

    cooky1257 pfm Member

    Doublethink has had a part to play in how this issue has got out of control however it isn't doublethink to post an observation/impression of someone else's position.
    The whole credibility of both sides rests on the evidence(not the number of complaints) and how it is judged against the IHRA definitions.
    No Labour supporters here want a single Anti-Semite to get away with it, they have no place in the Party but equally let the bar be set by the IHRA definition before a complaint is made too.
     
  11. Still

    Still he said his naim was ralph

    Your observation appeared to be doublethink.

    The credibility of LP also rested on timely and effective action/resolution. Hence loss of associated trust.

    I agree that's true in principle. However the four odd years of wonky practice are remarkable and also an issue.
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2019
  12. Brian

    Brian Eating fat, staying slim

    No, I didn’t say that, as I think you know very well. I rest my case. You will spin anything to fit your agenda.

    Objectionable as he may be does not mean the allegations against him are proven to be true.
     
  13. russel

    russel ./_dazed_and_confused


    It would be interesting to look at the amount of coverage given to Labour AS allegations verses the coverage of the deaths of black people in police custody, it’s almost as if black UK citizens lives were unimportant.
     
  14. Still

    Still he said his naim was ralph

    whataboutism akimbo
     
  15. Brian

    Brian Eating fat, staying slim

    Yes. Along with many other such comparisons that show the extent of the anti-Labour smear campaign, especially by the BBC.

    Trolling along...
     
    ks.234 likes this.
  16. russel

    russel ./_dazed_and_confused

    Not really, it’s asking why we tolerate prejudice about prejudice.
     
  17. russel

    russel ./_dazed_and_confused

    What I was implying was is the coverage proportional to the problem that exists, I don’t think it is because there are other factors at play beside the worry about anti semitism, which I do believe is a problem by the way despite your best attempts to think otherwise.
     
  18. Still

    Still he said his naim was ralph

    russel this was my point.

    Don’t get in the way


    Every year, I get some dog tags made up with my new annual mottoes. Last year’s was “Always ride out as if meeting your nemesis” – ie, a reminder always to leave the house with your hair looking big, lest you bump into an ex-boyfriend. This year’s is the more succinct “Don’t get in the way”.

    You know how it goes. Some people are discussing something – posting links, proffering ideas – and then some third party will rock up and say (often smugly, I regret to say) “What about blah?” – mentioning some completely tangential but controversial side issue that invariably attracts a whole host of controversy-hungry arguers who will then pile into the conversation, arguing among themselves.

    The original posters spend an hour or two fending off the increasingly hysterical whirlpool of demands being thrown at them, before finally logging off, exhausted, and leaving the original debate to die.

    The kind of people who parachute into other people’s debates want, essentially, attention. They are acting as if the only way to draw attention to the causes they are passionate about is to piggyback them on to the cause you are being passionate about.

    But the internet is a literally limitless space! Be passionate about your passion in your passion area – do not try to infiltrate my passion area. It is one of the key hindrances to things getting done on the internet, loading down one conversational donkey with a million other conversations, until its back breaks and a whole area of conversation is avoided, because it smells of dead donkey. One of the key drivers of the “Getting in the way” crew is the feeling that if someone is talking/campaigning about something, they must talk/campaign about everything. The subconscious belief being that, at some point, someone will come along – some Campaign Jesus – and he will solve everything. He will compile a complete and perfect manifesto with solutions to everything, and until that person comes along, everyone – and everything – is, essentially, useless.

    This fundamentally misunderstands several things, the key one being just how likely this is to happen. (This is 0% likely to happen. Even if we look at the most inspiring and astonishing people ever to come along – Gandhi, Mandela, Sir Alex Ferguson – they didn’t do everything. They had a couple of areas in which they were incredibly visionary, powerful and determined – decolonisation of India, the end of apartheid, winning the treble – but they weren’t also tackling FGM, climate change, sex-trafficking and the World Cup. They specialised.)

    The future is a communal effort, like a patchwork quilt. Everyone interested in forming our society takes a square each – a square they have chosen according to their interests, knowledge and ability – and sews it, then we join them together to make a fabulous quilt. That’s how things get done.

    When you get accosted by someone going, “You cannot talk about BLAH unless you also talk about BLAH”, the best response is, “I know – you do BLAH and I’ll do BLAH, and then the world will be twice as improved! Thanks for volunteering! You’re a total mensch. On behalf of the rest of the world – thank you!”


    Caitlin Moran


    Possibly this will prove to be an idiot magnet.
     
  19. Cav

    Cav pfm Member

    tl;dr. Autobiographical?
     
  20. Still

    Still he said his naim was ralph


     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice