All things Labour Party

Are the young really supporting him, surely they will have seen him as he is now!!

If only we could get a new political party that would fit in with CB's social justice, economic growth and POSITIVE change.

You have to have wealth creators to be able to support the weak. So let the big earners here/come to the UK and earn well, but in turn they have to contribute and not look at sidestepping the rightful tax.

 

The companies like Amazon etc who seem to hide in the ether need to be either trimmed or held to account. Perhaps a import levy on overseas internet purchases. California now have an import tax from outside states/countries. One of my clients had to pay if I recall correctly 10% local tax on items he purchased from me in the UK.

The internet retailers are costing us as they destroy the jobs in the high street.

 

We can slap a few import levies on things after Brexit.

 

#takebackcontrol

this clears it all up.

 

 

Williamson himself is now in hot water (or maybe lukewarm water, given this is Corbyn's party) for enthusiastically endorsing a speech given by an Assad-loving conspiracy theorist who is on record as describing murdered Labour MP Jo Cox as a 'warmongering al Qaeda advocate.'

 

Venessa Beeley is a hero among the most cretinous extremists in the Corbyn cult because of her Assad-sponsored endorsement of mass murder: her campaign against the White Helmets (also 'al Qaeda') and her convenient description of all people within Islamist-controlled areas in Syria as 'legitimate targets'. Her Jew-hating also makes her particularly popular amongst the more lunatic cultists: she's described France as being ruled by 'Zionists'.

 

Williamson is now being 'looked into'. But he's a Corbyn loyalist so nothing will come of it.

 

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/labour-mp-chris-williamson-vanessa-beeley_uk_5b7adee4e4b018b93e963784

The Morning Star (that bastion of the Mainstream media...oh wait) has listed all the events and trips that Jezza 'forgot' to declare. Of course all of these could have been paid by himself, but trips to Mexico don't come cheap!

 

Without wanting to cross over to the Brexit thread, I heard Barry Gardner - another dreadfully weak shadow minister - get himself into knots about Labour's position on Brexit. He was a vocal remainer and has repeatedly stated that the short to medium term economic outlook is bleak outside of the EU, even more so with no deal. But he is stuck following the apathy and indifference of Corbyn.

 

I must have missed the moment that democracy is all about one vote and the people aren't allowed to change their f*cking minds!!! If Jezza actually was a competent politician, he would have identified the opportunity to get behind a 'People's vote' and screw the Government. But he isn't and he hasn't.

 

In the end, Brexit will finish him off. The younger voters who flocked to him with his 'Everything will be free' nonsense will become disenchanted and remember his inaction. The Tories won't benefit directly, because they simply won't vote- but they will get back in because of the core support who do.

He must have accidentally stumbled into this little gathering...

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6079695/Corbyn-met-group-Hamas-extremists-PARLIAMENT.html

He must have accidentally stumbled into this little gathering...

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6079695/Corbyn-met-group-Hamas-extremists-PARLIAMENT.html

I bet the mail have a lot of these type of things and will just release them fairly regularly until it has the desired effect and its entirely his own fault. Edited 21 August, 2018 by hypochondriac

In the meantime, Jezza (and Rio) wishes you all a joyous eid mubarak.

Trouble is most of the Labour voters are in love with Palestine and the peaceful way it protests against its oppressor.

If Jezza actually was a competent politician, he would have identified the opportunity to get behind a 'People's vote' and screw the Government. But he isn't and he hasn't.

 

In the end, Brexit will finish him off. The younger voters who flocked to him with his 'Everything will be free' nonsense will become disenchanted and remember his inaction. The Tories won't benefit directly, because they simply won't vote- but they will get back in because of the core support who do.

 

In this instance it’s absolutely nothing to do with being a competent politician, he’s as anti EU as JRM, Boris or Nigel Farage, Tony Benn is his political hero FFS. He’s voted time and time again with Bill Cash, Kate Hoey et el, and only “changed his mind” when he realised it could cost him the leadership. Anybody who supports him thinking he was pro EU is a moron of the highest degree . Contrast his campaigning during the GE to his lack of effort during the referendum. You seriously can’t tell me that all his cult members thought he’d try and keep us in the EU.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The crucial bit is Politician. Politics is the game of power. He currently doesn’t have it. If he added his weight behind a second referendum he would pick up enough votes to comfortably win the next election. I agree the cultish element are very naive to think that he is anything other than anti-EU (like the good socialist he is). I am fully aware of his past views and beliefs, but currently the only way that he can realistically win the next election is by supporting a second referendum. He wouldn’t even need to campaign for it - it literally is as simple as pushing the Government into a position where they have to go back to the people.

 

It so blindingly obvious, but he is incompetent as a Politician.

The crucial bit is Politician. Politics is the game of power. He currently doesn’t have it. If he added his weight behind a second referendum he would pick up enough votes to comfortably win the next election. I agree the cultish element are very naive to think that he is anything other than anti-EU (like the good socialist he is). I am fully aware of his past views and beliefs, but currently the only way that he can realistically win the next election is by supporting a second referendum. He wouldn’t even need to campaign for it - it literally is as simple as pushing the Government into a position where they have to go back to the people.

 

It so blindingly obvious, but he is incompetent as a Politician.

 

I’m sorry I don’t agree. He needs to win an extra 50 plus seats, where’s he going to get them from if he calls for a second referendum. The leftie Remoaners voted for him last time, a doubt there’s many more seats he can gain from pleasing that side of the debate,and you’re deluded if you think Grieve, Soubry type Tories will vote for him. The seats he needs are Tory/Labour marginals that voted Leave. How on earth is your suggested policy going to win them over, and that’s not even taking into account seats like Skinners that they managed to hold onto last time. He may take some in Scotland, but it’ll be a zero sum game by the time he’s lost as many Leave areas.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’m sorry I don’t agree. He needs to win an extra 50 plus seats, where’s he going to get them from if he calls for a second referendum. The leftie Remoaners voted for him last time, a doubt there’s many more seats he can gain from pleasing that side of the debate,and you’re deluded if you think Grieve, Soubry type Tories will vote for him. The seats he needs are Tory/Labour marginals that voted Leave. How on earth is your suggested policy going to win them over, and that’s not even taking into account seats like Skinners that they managed to hold onto last time. He may take some in Scotland, but it’ll be a zero sum game by the time he’s lost as many Leave areas.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

And there's the problem. Thanks to Cameron, Johnson and Farage etc, whoever is PM and leader of the opposition have an absolute nightmare of a job.

However, as thing stands I'd agree, it's time for JC to come out for a second referendum.

I’m sorry I don’t agree. He needs to win an extra 50 plus seats, where’s he going to get them from if he calls for a second referendum. The leftie Remoaners voted for him last time, a doubt there’s many more seats he can gain from pleasing that side of the debate,and you’re deluded if you think Grieve, Soubry type Tories will vote for him. The seats he needs are Tory/Labour marginals that voted Leave. How on earth is your suggested policy going to win them over, and that’s not even taking into account seats like Skinners that they managed to hold onto last time. He may take some in Scotland, but it’ll be a zero sum game by the time he’s lost as many Leave areas.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

If you believe some reports, traditional northern labour constituencies that voted leave are increasingly souring on Brexit.

Edited 21 August, 2018 by shurlock

Trouble is most of the Labour voters are in love with Palestine and the peaceful way it protests against its oppressor.

 

#victimblaming

And there's the problem. Thanks to Cameron, Johnson and Farage etc, whoever is PM and leader of the opposition have an absolute nightmare of a job.

 

I think there were 17 million others as well.

 

Anyway what’s the nightmare? If you’re a remainer it’s the easiest job in the world, a win win. How can you lose, country goes tits up , you didn’t vote leave. Goes ok and you’ve steered us through a difficult transition. Problem is the remain politicians are all pussies, too used to the EU wet nursing them.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited 21 August, 2018 by Lord Duckhunter

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-facebook-state-owned-social-media-bbc-iplayer-privacy-labour-public-ownership-a8504151.html

 

What world does he live in?

 

Not everything can be solved by the State!

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-facebook-state-owned-social-media-bbc-iplayer-privacy-labour-public-ownership-a8504151.html

 

What world does he live in?

 

Not everything can be solved by the State!

 

This is the work of the self-styled 'cyber-communist', Richard Barbrook, he of the pork-pie hats.

 

http://theconversation.com/corbyns-digital-meh-nifesto-is-too-rooted-in-the-past-to-offer-much-for-the-future-65003

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-facebook-state-owned-social-media-bbc-iplayer-privacy-labour-public-ownership-a8504151.html

 

What world does he live in?

 

Not everything can be solved by the State!

 

I have seen v1.1 of what this would look like.....have a look - https://peoplesmomentum.com/

I think there were 17 million others as well.

 

Anyway what’s the nightmare? If you’re a remainer it’s the easiest job in the world, a win win. How can you lose, country goes tits up , you didn’t vote leave. Goes ok and you’ve steered us through a difficult transition. Problem is the remain politicians are all pussies, too used to the EU wet nursing them.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quite how anyone wins if it goes tit up is quite a jump

So now we know (as if anyone couldn't guess)...

 

Jezza is a flat-out Jew hater. 'Zionists' - a euphemism for Jews in this country - are an alien breed in Britain, unable to assimilate even simple national traits as irony.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6087783/Jeremy-Corbyn-said-British-Zionists-no-sense-English-irony.html

So now we know (as if anyone couldn't guess)...

 

Jezza is a flat-out Jew hater. 'Zionists' - a euphemism for Jews in this country - are an alien breed in Britain, unable to assimilate even simple national traits as irony.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6087783/Jeremy-Corbyn-said-British-Zionists-no-sense-English-irony.html

 

Depends who you talk to: for some Jews and Zionists are used interchangeably; for others, they are quite different -and rightly so.

Replace ‘zionists’ with ‘Muslims’ and Corbyn with a Tory and tell me what the Corbyn apologists would do.

 

Replace it with ‘Mexicans’ and him with Trump and they’d organise a march whilst losing their shyt

Why is it a shock that Jezza doesn't like the jews to much?

 

His friends from Hezbollah and Hamas are not that keen either.

Replace ‘zionists’ with ‘Muslims’ and Corbyn with a Tory and tell me what the Corbyn apologists would do.

 

Replace it with ‘Mexicans’ and him with Trump and they’d organise a march whilst losing their shyt

 

Coz Zionists are not comparable to either Muslims or Mexicans. Not every Jew is a Zionist whereas every Muslim is a Muslim and every Mexican is a Mexican. Now if Corbyn referred explicitly to Jews the issue would be clearcut. In isolation, the statement “Zionists have no sense of English irony” arguably doesn’t fall foul of the IHRA definition of antisemitism.

 

Of course, there’s a huge conceit here. Elements of both sides revel in the linguistic and strategic ambiguity of what modern Zionism means to do their bidding - whether it’s to cloak naked antisemitism or conversely squash justified criticism of Israel. Quite possibly that includes Corbyn. But you’ll have to excuse me if I don’t reach that conclusion on the basis of a Mail article or a bloviating Stephen Pollack.

Edited 24 August, 2018 by shurlock

Coz Zionists are not comparable to either Muslims or Mexicans. Not every Jew is a Zionist whereas every Muslim is a Muslim and every Mexican is a Mexican. Now if Corbyn referred explicitly to Jews the issue would be clearcut. In isolation, the statement “Zionists have no sense of English irony” arguably doesn’t fall foul of the IHRA definition of antisemitism.

 

Of course, there’s a huge conceit here. Elements of both sides revel in the linguistic and strategic ambiguity of what modern Zionism means to do their bidding - whether it’s to cloak naked antisemitism or conversely squash justified criticism of Israel. Quite possibly that includes Corbyn. But you’ll have to excuse me if I don’t reach that conclusion on the basis of a Mail article or a bloviating Stephen Pollack.

 

With a few horrific exceptions, left anti-Semitism attempts to steer clear of using the word ‘Jews’, always – as Corbyn does – using the word ‘Zionists’ instead. They then play their favourite word game – claiming that being anti-Zionist is not being anti-Semitic, and that to claim otherwise is a ‘smear’ and an attempt to shut down debate.

 

That, in the vast majority of cases, is nonsense.

 

Let’s compare Zionism with apartheid. The latter is explicitly a white supremacist creed: blacks should have ‘separate development’ because they are intellectually inferior. The most extreme form of Zionism – the kind you hear among the settlers – is not much different. It is explicitly a nasty form of racism.

 

However, unlike apartheid, Zionism is a very broad ideology which encompasses people across a wide political spectrum. The minimal definition for a Zionist is someone who believes that the state of Israel has a right to exist. That view is held by about 98% of Jewish Israelis and the vast majority of Jews elsewhere. Of course there are a few Jews who are opposed to the state of Israel’s right to exist, but they are a tiny minority (usually found on platforms with Corbyn, as it happens).

 

So what does it mean when Corbyn complains of ‘Zionists’? He’s talking about Jews. He makes that plain by his sneering reference to their not being in some way native to Britain, and how they lack a capability to understand ‘irony’. He’s playing to his audience (which naturally includes those who advocate terror and deny the Holocaust). And it’s music to their ears because it’s dog-whistle Jew-hating – these Jew weirdos, ‘thankfully silent’, who don’t get irony.

 

The depressing reality is that it’s so EASY to criticise Israeli governments without resorting to straight-up (or barely disguised) Jew hating. When people protested and campaigned against the apartheid regime is South Africa, they attacked with the word, meaning and practice of ‘apartheid’. No one was thinking up irrelevant comparators, not least because, in Israel, it deflects from the specific horrors of the Netanyahu gang. But also because it tarnishes the vast majority of Jews, in whose name Netanyahu is not acting, but who believe nonetheless in the right of Israel to exist.

 

So, no, I’m not going to give Corbyn a free pass. He’s a Jew hater in the old Stalinist sense – Uncle Joe loved nothing more to cap a few thousand Jews with the claim that they had loyalties to another state. Corbyn’s ‘irony’ comment belongs to the same species of rhetoric – those damned Jews don’t ‘get’ us because no matter how long they’ve been here they’ll never really assimilate to our way of thinking.

 

I say all of this as someone who thinks of himself as pro-Palestinian – something, incidentally, I act upon, unlike a few on here who pipe up with their little pearls of wisdom.

So now we know (as if anyone couldn't guess)...

 

Jezza is a flat-out Jew hater. 'Zionists' - a euphemism for Jews in this country - are an alien breed in Britain, unable to assimilate even simple national traits as irony.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6087783/Jeremy-Corbyn-said-British-Zionists-no-sense-English-irony.html

 

You really think The Mail cares about Jewish people or *drumroll* it has some other not so secret agenda?

You really think The Mail cares about Jewish people or *drumroll* it has some other not so secret agenda?

The agenda of the mail isn't particularly relevant when corbyn is damned by his own words

The agenda of the mail isn't particularly relevant when corbyn is damned by his own words

 

The word Zionist?

So, no, I’m not going to give Corbyn a free pass. He’s a Jew hater in the old Stalinist sense – Uncle Joe loved nothing more to cap a few thousand Jews with the claim that they had loyalties to another state.

 

I can can't claim to be as well read and as intectually rounded as you but I think you've just accused Corbyn of being pro-holocaust. Only an extremely gullible type could absorb so much dodgy and main stream media and conclude Corbyn is as actually a Nazi in disguise.

*(braces himself for Pepe to shout excitedly "that's exactly what he is!")*

You really think The Mail cares about Jewish people or *drumroll* it has some other not so secret agenda?

Obviously the Daily Mail don't want Corbyn anywhere near the levers of power and will continue to pound him until they think that threat has passed.

 

And who can blame them? Corbyn is a monumental bellend.

Obviously the Daily Mail don't want Corbyn anywhere near the levers of power and will continue to pound him until they think that threat has passed.

 

And who can blame them? Corbyn is a monumental bellend.

 

What a sophisticated analysis.

What a sophisticated analysis.

The point is that if there weren't so many different incriminating encounters or speeches or social media gaffes that innocent old Jeremy has inadvertently stumbled into, then rags like the mail would have nothing to fire at him. Sadly for you the list is so wide and diverse that they can just sit back and drip feed a new anti-jew story on a weekly basis. It wasn't the mail that did all this, it was Jeremy himself. One or two things maybe you could argue that he's just misunderstood but all of this stuff taken in its entirety and its absolutely clear thst Jeremy has some very dodgy views and really shouldn't be anywhere near the leadership of the Labour Party. And that's based solely on the Jewish stuff before you even address anythibg else.

The point is that if there weren't so many different incriminating encounters or speeches or social media gaffes that innocent old Jeremy has inadvertently stumbled into, then rags like the mail would have nothing to fire at him. Sadly for you the list is so wide and diverse that they can just sit back and drip feed a new anti-jew story on a weekly basis. It wasn't the mail that did all this, it was Jeremy himself. One or two things maybe you could argue that he's just misunderstood but all of this stuff taken in its entirety and its absolutely clear thst Jeremy has some very dodgy views and really shouldn't be anywhere near the leadership of the Labour Party. And that's based solely on the Jewish stuff before you even address anythibg else.

 

You think Corbyn is pro-holocaust?

I can can't claim to be as well read and as intectually rounded as you but I think you've just accused Corbyn of being pro-holocaust. Only an extremely gullible type could absorb so much dodgy and main stream media and conclude Corbyn is as actually a Nazi in disguise.

*(braces himself for Pepe to shout excitedly "that's exactly what he is!")*

 

Christ almighty. You do know that Stalin and Hitler were different people. Right?

 

Just in case...

 

Stalin - communist (the Great Terror)

 

Hitler - Nazi (Holocaust).

Christ almighty. You do know that Stalin and Hitler were different people. Right?

 

Just in case...

 

Stalin - communist (the Great Terror)

 

Hitler - Nazi (Holocaust).

 

You basically stated that Corbyn is in favour of killing thousands of Jews. What's the difference?

With a few horrific exceptions, left anti-Semitism attempts to steer clear of using the word ‘Jews’, always – as Corbyn does – using the word ‘Zionists’ instead. They then play their favourite word game – claiming that being anti-Zionist is not being anti-Semitic, and that to claim otherwise is a ‘smear’ and an attempt to shut down debate.

 

That, in the vast majority of cases, is nonsense.

 

Let’s compare Zionism with apartheid. The latter is explicitly a white supremacist creed: blacks should have ‘separate development’ because they are intellectually inferior. The most extreme form of Zionism – the kind you hear among the settlers – is not much different. It is explicitly a nasty form of racism.

 

However, unlike apartheid, Zionism is a very broad ideology which encompasses people across a wide political spectrum. The minimal definition for a Zionist is someone who believes that the state of Israel has a right to exist. That view is held by about 98% of Jewish Israelis and the vast majority of Jews elsewhere. Of course there are a few Jews who are opposed to the state of Israel’s right to exist, but they are a tiny minority (usually found on platforms with Corbyn, as it happens).

 

So what does it mean when Corbyn complains of ‘Zionists’? He’s talking about Jews. He makes that plain by his sneering reference to their not being in some way native to Britain, and how they lack a capability to understand ‘irony’. He’s playing to his audience (which naturally includes those who advocate terror and deny the Holocaust). And it’s music to their ears because it’s dog-whistle Jew-hating – these Jew weirdos, ‘thankfully silent’, who don’t get irony.

 

The depressing reality is that it’s so EASY to criticise Israeli governments without resorting to straight-up (or barely disguised) Jew hating. When people protested and campaigned against the apartheid regime is South Africa, they attacked with the word, meaning and practice of ‘apartheid’. No one was thinking up irrelevant comparators, not least because, in Israel, it deflects from the specific horrors of the Netanyahu gang. But also because it tarnishes the vast majority of Jews, in whose name Netanyahu is not acting, but who believe nonetheless in the right of Israel to exist.

 

So, no, I’m not going to give Corbyn a free pass. He’s a Jew hater in the old Stalinist sense – Uncle Joe loved nothing more to cap a few thousand Jews with the claim that they had loyalties to another state. Corbyn’s ‘irony’ comment belongs to the same species of rhetoric – those damned Jews don’t ‘get’ us because no matter how long they’ve been here they’ll never really assimilate to our way of thinking.

 

I say all of this as someone who thinks of himself as pro-Palestinian – something, incidentally, I act upon, unlike a few on here who pipe up with their little pearls of wisdom.

 

There’s a tendency to treat Zionism as timeless and stable rather than something than comes in many shapes and sizes.

 

There are parallels with nationalism here: a minimal definition might be a belief in the nation-state - that peoples have a claim to self determination and that membership of the nation provides the main focus of political obligation and identity. In the nineteenth century, nationalism and liberalism were seen as natural bedfellows per Herder and Mill. In much the same way original Herzlian Zionism was both a nationalist movement and liberal one.

 

In contrast, there are those who believe that nationalism and liberalism are an inherent contradiction in terms. Others point to the empirical record of nationalism and its difficulty in keeping its darker impulses in check. These tensions are particularly evident in Israel following the 1967 war and the establishment of settlements beyond the green line.

 

It is why respected public intellectuals like Peter Beinart and Bernard Avishai respectively talk about a ‘crisis of Zionism’ or the ‘tragedy of Zionism’. See Avishai’s recent piece for the New Yorker which is much gloomier than his earlier work: among other things only one sixth of Israelis today value a democratic state with equality for all.

 

Personally I’m not a fan of the term as it is too promiscuous and too cryptic -insensitive to scumbag antisemites who use it to deny Israel’s right to exist on the one hand and those who criticise the way Zionism has come to be practiced as a living ideology on the other. But to the extent that successive Israeli governments have wrapped themselves in the banner of Zionism -albeit one possible expression of Zionism- to justify some very dubious policies, I understand see why some deem it a valid target.

Edited 25 August, 2018 by shurlock

There’s a tendency to treat Zionism as timeless and stable rather than something than comes in many shapes and sizes.

 

There are parallels with nationalism here: a minimal definition might be a belief in the nation-state - that peoples have a claim to self determination and that membership of the nation provides the main focus of political obligation and identity. In the nineteenth century, nationalism and liberalism were seen as natural bedfellows per Herder and Mill. In much the same way original Herzlian Zionism was both a nationalist movement and liberal one.

 

In contrast, there are those who believe that nationalism and liberalism are an inherent contradiction in terms. Others point to the empirical record of nationalism and its difficulty in keeping its darker impulses in check. These tensions are particularly evident in Israel following the 1967 war and the establishment of settlements beyond the green line.

 

It is why respected public intellectuals like Peter Beinart and Bernard Avishai respectively talk about a ‘crisis of Zionism’ or the ‘tragedy of Zionism’. See Avishai’s recent piece for the New Yorker which is much gloomier than his earlier work: among other things only one sixth of Israelis today value a democratic state with equality for all.

 

Personally I’m not a fan of the term as it is too promiscuous and too cryptic -insensitive to scumbag antisemites who use it to deny Israel’s right to exist on the one hand and those who criticise the way Zionism has come to be practiced as a living ideology on the other. But to the extent that successive Israeli governments have wrapped themselves in the banner of Zionism -albeit one possible expression of Zionism- to justify some very dubious policies, I understand see why some deem it a valid target.

 

I don't think Zionism is a parallel with nationalism - it IS a form of nationalism. And whatever the concerns about crises in Zionism (and I accept many of the arguments about this), the one historical fact that places it in the forefront of the vast majority of Jews' minds is the Holocaust. Before the rise of Hitler, European Jews, as well as Jews in the Middle East (of which there were a large number in Palestine long before 1948), Zionists were in a clear and very small minority. Jews were, by and large, assimilators. But the Nazis' genocide changed that for good. The fact that some variants of Zionism have now morphed into the extremism you hear from Netanyahu and the settlers doesn't alter the equally certain fact that Zionism - the right of Israel to exist - is a bedrock belief for the most liberal of Jews (obviously with a small number of exceptions), both in Israel and outside.

 

Nationalism has long interested me. As an undergraduate I once got to talk with Ernest Gellner his idea that nationalism was historically a weak political force (and tied, in his theory, to modernisation), anad we discussed the outliers of Israeli and Palestinian nationalism (outliers because they polarise religious beliefs and because they lay claims to incredibly scarce land - the Israelis seeking land and security and the Palestinians land and state-viability).

 

But this isn't really the issue with Corbyn. He's always fought a battle which in his mind is a good-vs-evil struggle between Zionism and Palestinian nationalism - screening out of his mind the religious dimension (including the murderous Islamism of Hamas). It's also 'ironic' that he fails to grasp the other 'history' of the Palestinians - their severe and repeated oppression by Arab states.

 

Remember, Black September was formed as a response to actions by the Jordanian government, not the Israelis, and the first victim of Black September was the Jordanian prime minister. Palestinians have been second-class citizens in Jordan (where they make up 75% of the population), Lebanon (where Christian Arabs murdered them en masse at Sabra and Chatilla under the eyes of the Israeli army), Kuwait (where their treatment by was so bad that they cheered when Saddam invaded), and Syria (I've witnessed this first hand, but there's a long history to this).

 

How much does Corbyn talk about this oppression? I don't think he ever has - although anyone is welcome to show me otherwise. He's only interested in those damned Jews. But as I've said, given the frightening scarcity of land being fought over, no solution whatsoever is possible without Israeli support, or indeed from British Jews and others who support the two-state solution. As Stephen Bush says:

 

90 per cent of British Jews identify themselves as supporters of Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state, although surveys of the British Jewish community also consistently show that large majorities support withdrawal from all or part of the Occupied Territories, as well as the establishment of a Palestinian state.

 

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2018/08/jeremy-corbyn-anti-semitism-remarks-british-zionists-offensive

 

Corbyn seems a million miles from grasping this - and it's no longer that he resembles a straight-up Jew hater (only approving of a few 'good Jews'); he actually is one. His cretinous fans can scream 'smear' all they like. But when their hero attracts the approving support of two of the most reptilian racists around - David Duke, the 'grand wizard' of the Ku Klux Klan, and Nick Griffin - then you'd think it might give them at least a moment's pause.

There ain’t many MP’s that are respected across the political divide, but Frank Field is one of them. Of course he’s getting mountains of clogg from the “kinder and gentler “ lefties that make up the membership nowadays. Let’s see if any of the “moderates “ have the balls that Frank has and leave the cesspit created by Corbyn

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There ain’t many MP’s that are respected across the political divide, but Frank Field is one of them. Of course he’s getting mountains of clogg from the “kinder and gentler “ lefties that make up the membership nowadays. Let’s see if any of the “moderates “ have the balls that Frank has and leave the cesspit created by Corbyn

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Real balls would be triggering a new election in his seat.

Jared O'Mara didn’t, Woodcock didn’t, Naz Shah didnt, in fact I can’t recall one mp that became an independent that has. Although that hasn’t stopped Corbyns attack dogs having a go at one of the most respected men in Westminster. Reports are he’s considering calling a vote, even the loony left must realise he’ll wipe the floor with them if he does.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Edited 31 August, 2018 by Lord Duckhunter

I always respected Frank Field. Still do. Can't believe anyone could call Corbyn anti semitic unless the refined definition of anti semitism includes as anti semitic anybody, such as me, who finds the Israeli govt policies towards Palestinians offensive....

I always respected Frank Field. Still do. Can't believe anyone could call Corbyn anti semitic unless the refined definition of anti semitism includes as anti semitic anybody, such as me, who finds the Israeli govt policies towards Palestinians offensive....

 

It is not anti-Semitic to criticise the actions and policies of the Israeli government - especially with the vicious Netanyahu in power. It is anti-Semitic to question the 'Englishness' of a Jew or some Jews. That's what Corbyn did - which makes him a rather old fashioned, straight down-the-line anti-Semite. As the Tebbit Test is to Pakistanis, so Corbyn's Irony Test is to Jews.

 

You're making the same mistake as Corbyn makes - call it the virtue delusion, which states: If I am good, I can do no wrong. Of course, 'good' is self-defining. So when Corbyn and his cult whine on about how they can't possibly be anti-Semitic simply on the grounds that they are virtuously anti-racist, you might see how this might be a problem.

It is not anti-Semitic to criticise the actions and policies of the Israeli government - especially with the vicious Netanyahu in power. It is anti-Semitic to question the 'Englishness' of a Jew or some Jews. That's what Corbyn did - which makes him a rather old fashioned, straight down-the-line anti-Semite. As the Tebbit Test is to Pakistanis, so Corbyn's Irony Test is to Jews.

 

You're making the same mistake as Corbyn makes - call it the virtue delusion, which states: If I am good, I can do no wrong. Of course, 'good' is self-defining. So when Corbyn and his cult whine on about how they can't possibly be anti-Semitic simply on the grounds that they are virtuously anti-racist, you might see how this might be a problem.

 

Pakistani and Zionist are not strictly comparable. Islamist is perhaps closer to Zionist in the sense that both are loosely political ideologies but again is unsatisfactory.

Edited 31 August, 2018 by shurlock

This anti-semitism thing is getting extremely boring now - I'm not a Corbyn fan and I think his very existence of leader of the opposition has been extremely bad for this country, and politics in general - but this constant barrage from the media and Labour rebels is just nauseatingly tedious.

Pakistani and Zionist are not strictly comparable. Islamist is perhaps closer to Zionist in the sense that both are loosely political ideologies but again is unsatisfactory.

 

The comparison is indeed wrong. But it also misses the point.

 

It's not what these things are, but how they are perceived by racists. Non-England-supporting British-Pakistanis (and presumably British Indians and Sri Lankans) fail Tebbit's test of loyalty. Jews who don't get irony fail the Corbyn test of whether or not someone is truly English (no matter how long they've lived here).

 

In both cases, people are being told that they are not properly English.

 

And before anyone else objects that Jews are a religious group and not a race, and therefore can't be the victims of racism, try this little experiment of the imagination. Picture yourself as a German Jewish shopkeeper in Nazi Germany in 1938. You're wearing your yellow star, as required by law, and your shop has all its windows smashed out, as required by the Nazi mobs. Until now, you've been a 'good German': you fought heroically in the first world war, and you renounced your Judaism and even Germanified your surname. You have nothing that could be called faith in a Jewish god.

 

Then one day, the SS turn up on your doorstep. They're about the cart you off to a death camp when you have a bright idea: all you need to do is tell them that you're actually not Jewish because you no longer believe in the religion.

 

How do think that would turn out?

 

National identity tests always end badly. For a start, they're not genuine tests. They are designed merely to stigmatise and to create the sense of an alien Other. The perfect breeding ground for the torch-burning, window-smashing mobs.

The comparison is indeed wrong. But it also misses the point.

 

It's not what these things are, but how they are perceived by racists. Non-England-supporting British-Pakistanis (and presumably British Indians and Sri Lankans) fail Tebbit's test of loyalty. Jews who don't get irony fail the Corbyn test of whether or not someone is truly English (no matter how long they've lived here).

 

In both cases, people are being told that they are not properly English.

 

And before anyone else objects that Jews are a religious group and not a race, and therefore can't be the victims of racism, try this little experiment of the imagination. Picture yourself as a German Jewish shopkeeper in Nazi Germany in 1938. You're wearing your yellow star, as required by law, and your shop has all its windows smashed out, as required by the Nazi mobs. Until now, you've been a 'good German': you fought heroically in the first world war, and you renounced your Judaism and even Germanified your surname. You have nothing that could be called faith in a Jewish god.

 

Then one day, the SS turn up on your doorstep. They're about the cart you off to a death camp when you have a bright idea: all you need to do is tell them that you're actually not Jewish because you no longer believe in the religion.

 

How do think that would turn out?

 

National identity tests always end badly. For a start, they're not genuine tests. They are designed merely to stigmatise and to create the sense of an alien Other. The perfect breeding ground for the torch-burning, window-smashing mobs.

 

Needless to say, Hitler wasn’t your bogstandard antisemite - whereas older Christian notions of antisemitism which offered Jews the escape route of conversion, Hitler redefined life in Nazi Germany in purely racial terms. Drawing on all kinds of dodgy pseudo-science fashionable at the time, Hitler effectively biologised Jewishness, transforming it into an analterable characteristic. Contemporary antisemitism, at least on the left, has nothing in common with this.

 

By definition, fundamentalists do not get irony. No doubt some Zionists tick that box (as do some Corbynistas). Invoking Englishness, in this respect, was utterly gratuitous. However whether Corbyn was attempting to essentialise a group and mark it out as non-English or rather was employing hyperbole in the context of a speech by a foreign speaker in order to patronise his opponents is debatable. Either way it was extremely offensive.

Edited 31 August, 2018 by shurlock

Needless to say, Hitler wasn’t your bogstandard antisemite - whereas older Christian notions of antisemitism which offered Jews the escape route of conversion, Hitler redefined life in Nazi Germany in purely racial terms. Drawing on all kinds of dodgy pseudo-science fashionable at the time, Hitler effectively biologised Jewishness, transforming it into an analterable characteristic. Contemporary antisemitism, at least on the left, has nothing in common with this.

 

By definition, fundamentalists do not get irony. No doubt some Zionists tick that box (as do some Corbynistas). Invoking Englishness, in this respect, was utterly gratuitous. However whether Corbyn was attempting to essentialise a group and mark it out as non-English or rather was employing hyperbole in the context of a speech by a foreign speaker in order to patronise his opponents is debatable. Either way it was extremely offensive.

 

Hitler's racial ideas did indeed have their antecedents, so he wasn't somehow special - he was just ripping off and bastardising already bad ideas (I've actually been in offices, with their rather creepy contents, once occupied by two of the most important and notorious precursors - Francis Galton at UCL and Charles Davenport at Cold Spring Harbour).

 

One of the things that confuses the debate about anti-Jewish racism in the Labour party is its multiples sources. Some of it, astoundingly, is lifted straight from the Hitler playbook - and equally astoundingly there are plenty of examples of this. Here's Scott Nelson, for example - notice both his arms clasped around Corbyn in that familiar and creepily cultish way.

 

He blathers on about the 'Jewish blood' of companies like M&S and Tesco causing deaths of workers - a classic Nazi trope.

 

https://antisemitism.uk/scott-nelson-who-was-removed-from-the-labour-party-following-tweets-about-jewish-companies-tells-caa-he-can-apply-to-rejoin-whether-you-like-it-or-not/

 

Then there's the kind of Jew-hating engaged in fairly widely within Muslim communities, that's found its way into Labour because of its courting of Muslim electorates. Naz Shah's Facebook post content about relocating Jews from Israel to the US is quite typical of the things you hear (I have heard), even in 'polite' society.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44788629

 

Then there's what you might call political Jew hating. A classic and appalling example is the decision by the Birkenhead CLP - Frank Field's constituency party - to ban the Jewish Labour Movement from running equality and diversity workshops on anti-Semitism, on the grounds that JLM had 'possible links' with ISIS.

 

https://twitter.com/jewishlabour/status/1035193153865826305?s=21

 

This is the kind of Jew-hating which also exhibits itself in Labour members hissing 'Zio' at Jewish party members in Oxford, and in the tidal wave of abuse hurled by the cult at Jewish members of parliament.

 

And finally, there's that weird, rather genteel English Middle class anti-Semitism, in which Corbyn - born into just that world - exhibits when he drones on about the lack of 'Englishness' of Jews (whether it's some or all Jews is neither here nor there).

 

Overlaid with this are two things. First, a relentless and cynical denialism that claims, effectively, that none of what individual Jews have complained about has any validity - thereby doubling down on the anti-Semitism itself (ie Jews as a species are making things up about Jezza's army and have no right to feel intimidated or bullied).

 

And secondly, vanishingly few cultists seem to have any real first-hand experience of what they're talking about. I bet a large number of them have never so much as met a Palestinian. Yet out in the real world, the oppression of the Palestinians has many facets. It's not just the unjust and often violent actions of the Israeli government. As I've said before, a huge number of Palestinians (75% of Jordan's entire population, for example) now live outside Israel and the occupied territories. And they have had a terrible time.

 

The latest serial abuser of Palestinians is Bashar Assad - Palestinian-baiting is a family tradition inherited from his father.. Here's the ever-impressive Peter Tatchell on the abuse, murder and looting carried out by Assad's forces in Yarmouk, a Palestinian refugee camp in Damascus, which, according to the UN, was 'transformed into a death camp' by the Assad regime:

 

https://www.opendemocracy.net/north-africa-west-asia/budour-hassan/yarmouk-late-obituary-for-capital-of-palestinian-diaspora

 

You won't find anyone in the Corbynista cult - nor even Corbyn himself - raising the issue of the oppression of Palestinians in the Arab world. It's simply airbrushed out of existence. It's just too inconvenient. And it doesn't fit the cultist narrative - that Jews alone are the cause of all evil.

 

Until Labour expunges ALL these forms of anti-Jewish racism, the problem won't go away. Personally, I don't see that happening soon, if at all. Although not alone by any means, Labour from now on will be seen as Britain's foremost source of Jew hating.

This anti-semitism thing is getting extremely boring now - I'm not a Corbyn fan and I think his very existence of leader of the opposition has been extremely bad for this country, and politics in general - but this constant barrage from the media and Labour rebels is just nauseatingly tedious.

 

It may be tedious or boring to you, but often it is precisely this apathy that allows things to become normalised. We are a long way from the historical parallels that I have seen mentioned on this thread, but clearly there is a problem in the Labour party and particularly in the Cult that has developed around Corbyn.

It may be tedious or boring to you, but often it is precisely this apathy that allows things to become normalised. We are a long way from the historical parallels that I have seen mentioned on this thread, but clearly there is a problem in the Labour party and particularly in the Cult that has developed around Corbyn.

 

Clearly a problem but they are just as clearly trying to stamp it out. It's only the criticism of Israel thing that keeps certain people banging on about it. Problem is Corbyn has so many enemies and it's in all their interests to keep the issue in the media. I'm not a fan of Corbyn at all but I despise media witch hunts even more.

 

Do you actually think comparing Israel to Nazi Germany is racist?

Edited 3 September, 2018 by aintforever

Do you actually think comparing Israel to Nazi Germany is racist?

 

Not Racist, but in very poor taste and shouldn't be said by any Politician who wants a credible chance of running a country. No matter your stance on Israel and Palestine, Nazi Germany killed thousands of Jews in WW2, so yeah, bit of a **** comment by Jezza. But i'd expect nothing less of someone who hob nobs with Hamas and co.

Not Racist, but in very poor taste and shouldn't be said by any Politician who wants a credible chance of running a country. No matter your stance on Israel and Palestine, Nazi Germany killed thousands of Jews in WW2, so yeah, bit of a **** comment by Jezza. But i'd expect nothing less of someone who hob nobs with Hamas and co.

 

Of course it is, it's inaccurate, over the top and in very poor taste but that doesn't make it racist.

 

If comparing Israel to Nazi Germany is racist then comparing any country to Nazi Germany is racist. It's a dangerous road to go down when you are labelled racist for criticising the actions of a country.