Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2020 21:19:30 GMT 1
Boom ! Bit like Boris , why bother checking facts , just chuck anything out there and see where it lands . When challenged ignore it and carry on as before , trying to defend the indefensible . Classic tactics .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2020 21:26:40 GMT 1
Absolutely rife, as no doubt the 4th and 5th most powerful people in the UK will agree, or are Sunak and Patel the wrong type of islamists? I’m not racist, I’ve got black mates... Very commendable, I just have friends, regardless of colour creed or sexuality 👍👍👍
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Jun 25, 2020 21:33:44 GMT 1
Speaking of bottling …….. has Johnson sacked anyone yet? No, but he did not have to say he was going to stamp out anti Semitic behaviour... Pity he didn't acknowledge his party's problem with its Islamophobic members. Then again, a party whose leader carelessly spouts insultingly racist terms might be expected to reach the essential first stage; that of acknowledging the problem.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Jun 25, 2020 21:36:09 GMT 1
Speaking of bottling …….. has Johnson sacked anyone yet? Doesn't have too, he's got the support of the majority of the HofP behind him. And there in a nutshell is the once-in-every-five-years approach to accountability and democracy I was alluding to this morning.
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Jun 25, 2020 22:20:31 GMT 1
Absolutely rife, as no doubt the 4th and 5th most powerful people in the UK will agree, or are Sunak and Patel the wrong type of islamists? Behind The Queen, Boris and Dominic Cummings You make a good case for keeping the monarchy.
|
|
|
Post by Exkeeper on Jun 26, 2020 2:17:43 GMT 1
Bearing in mind both Sunak and Patel are from Hindu backgrounds you are quite correct in labelling them the wrong type of Islamists. Rather like our our esteemed leader, you have also failed to respond to the challenge over Islamophobia in the Tory party. If it genuinely doesn't exist, then why has the promised investigation not happened or if it has, then why has the report not been published? Since he has been leader he has had quite a busy time with pandemics and brexit and so on... And he has ballsed up both of those big time.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Jun 26, 2020 5:38:59 GMT 1
This has been coming because she has been sidelined on education - with other members of the shadow cabinet being put up for media interviews and her own press releases being put out at midnight by the Labour press team.
Within the Labour Party criticism of Israel is considered anti-semitic. This will get more intense as we get closer to an Israeli invasion of Palestinian territory. Reasonable people acting reasonably would say that the question of whether Israel is giving training to police forces in America is a factual one.
If this is really about AS then both women will be suspended pending investigation. Of course, that won't happen.
I'm glad to see this now out in the open. The lesson of the last five years is that disruption works. The left in the Labour Party needs to learn that lesson and apply it.
|
|
|
Post by shrewder on Jun 26, 2020 6:57:23 GMT 1
Not being committed to any particular political party means you are never tempted to defend the indefensible.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Jun 26, 2020 7:20:16 GMT 1
I think we're at the stage now where criticism of Israel will be seen as anti-Semitic by some within Labour because it's something that can, has and does turn into anti-Semitism and he clearly wants to put that to a stop, to nip it in the bud from the get go. Watched all this unfold on Twitter and you do wonder why on earth Long-Bailey shared that article in the first place. To me it just came across as the mutterings of the deluded left and the reason why so many us can't be doing with them and why we can't take them seriously. Never mind the supposed anti-Semitism, Peake seems to have grabbed the opportunity to get things off her chest with both hands and her opening gambit was "We’re being ruled by capitalist, fascist dictators." As soon as you reach "fascist dictators" then you know you really ought to be leaving this well alone. Peake goes on about getting rid of capitalism, getting rid of the establishment, before moving on to Israel and then she goes on to attack those who have previously voted Labour but couldn't, for perfectly valid reasons, vote for Corbyn. Considering what happened to the Labour party in December, that anyone within the party would want to associate themselves with Peake and her opinions in this article is beyond me. That Long-Bailey did so suggests that Starmer might be better off without her anyhow. But he is certainly going to have to deal with the after effects now big time. Do feel the only way forward for Labour is to split. They can't carry on like this. I mean if they ever want to be electable again anyhow. And that's before we even get to talk about so called "cancel culture" and the rights and wrongs of someone having to deal with that for simply sharing an article.
|
|
|
Post by davycrockett on Jun 26, 2020 7:35:50 GMT 1
Good news, decisive and necessary action from a Labour leader at last. Further displaying leadership and electable credentials they have dearly missed for 10 years Maybe but in what way was the tweet she retweeted anti Semitic?
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Jun 26, 2020 7:58:04 GMT 1
And there we have it. Downie assuming that anyone who is brown must be a Muslim. If that doesn't tell you everything you need to know, I really don't know what will. FYI Downie Muslims and Hindus don't seem to have a great recent history. Google it and f#####g educate yourself. Google it and ****ing educate yourself....😂😂 do you know why I won’t, I do actually know the difference, but their religion has no bearing to me, yes a bit ignorant that I did not know, but as they are just people and humans, and generally pretty decent, it does not bother me, and is irrelevant..... xx I wouldn't worry yourself Downie. Its that kind of thinking that sees the Tories with an 80 seat majority and ahead in the polls with the most ethnically diverse cabinet in the history of the UK. And when looking to someone like Sunak, having people in place who are well placed to see the Tories stay ahead of the opposition for some time to come.👍
|
|
|
Post by FloreatShrew on Jun 26, 2020 8:21:29 GMT 1
Good news, decisive and necessary action from a Labour leader at last. Further displaying leadership and electable credentials they have dearly missed for 10 years Maybe but in what way was the tweet she retweeted anti Semitic? www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2020/06/amnesty-international-we-never-reported-neck-kneeling-taught-israelis-usBecause it wasn't true, and failing to call out a blatant lazy attempt to link Israel with the death of Black Americans, which has since been retracted, in the current high emotional situation is dangerous and wrong. She's got form for ignoring it, and when Keir said Zero tolerance of Anti Semitic in the Labour party he meant that.
|
|
|
Post by FloreatShrew on Jun 26, 2020 8:27:36 GMT 1
Non-story really, other than a perfect opportunity for the saccharine socialist now running the Labour Party to play to the crowd. I’m more disappointed in Long Bailey not being savvy enough to see what lay ahead than I am with the content of the message she re-tweeted She's done it before a fair bit, she's a good cabinet hand but like Corbyn etc isn't leadership material.
|
|
|
Post by FloreatShrew on Jun 26, 2020 8:35:44 GMT 1
Absolutely rife, as no doubt the 4th and 5th most powerful people in the UK will agree, or are Sunak and Patel the wrong type of islamists? Behind The Queen, Boris and Dominic Cummings I'm so so glad we're leaving Europe. To have an unelected, not a member of the governments party ruling us. Oh wait that's what you wanted to get rid of.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2020 8:40:09 GMT 1
I get your point, but why not say that then? Saying it's Anti-Semitic, when it clearly isn't is, in my opinion, more dangerous and wrong. It's dangerous and wrong, because Israel denied using such techniques as a knee in the throat, despite the evidence. But, Starmer and the Labour Party are surprisingly silent on that. Surprisingly, because Starmer is a former human rights lawyer. Just sack her for the real reason.
|
|
|
Post by Mortgagehound on Jun 26, 2020 8:46:36 GMT 1
Very surprised Mr Northwestman is not onto this story.....
|
|
|
Post by FloreatShrew on Jun 26, 2020 8:48:26 GMT 1
I get your point, but why not say that then? Saying it's Anti-Semitic, when it clearly isn't is, in my opinion, more dangerous and wrong. It's dangerous and wrong, because Israel denied using such techniques as a knee in the throat, despite the evidence. But, Starmer and the Labour Party are surprisingly silent on that. Surprisingly, because Starmer is a former human rights lawyer. Just sack her for the real reason. I suppose you're gonna say the real reason is she's a "threat" to Keir? Read the article again please btw. Zero tolerance has to mean zero tolerance, and sometimes you have to just say no before it starts, the reaction of her supporters has been telling.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Jun 26, 2020 8:51:13 GMT 1
That article is a good read, thanks for sharing. I guess when you think about it, this is the crux of it... Those who find this allegation anti-Semitic do not dispute that international police forces share training in a manner of deep concern to international human rights watchdogs. What they do object to is the singling out of Israel in this allegation, when there is nothing to suggest that Israel played any greater part in Floyd’s death than the many other countries that share training with the US, and which also use aggressive restraining techniques. Why is the tragic killing of a black man at the hands of the police, in a country with a long history of racial discrimination and excessive force in policing, now being blamed on the world’s only Jewish-majority state, they ask?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2020 8:54:30 GMT 1
I get your point, but why not say that then? Saying it's Anti-Semitic, when it clearly isn't is, in my opinion, more dangerous and wrong. It's dangerous and wrong, because Israel denied using such techniques as a knee in the throat, despite the evidence. But, Starmer and the Labour Party are surprisingly silent on that. Surprisingly, because Starmer is a former human rights lawyer. Just sack her for the real reason. I suppose you're gonna say the real reason is she's a "threat" to Keir? Read the article again please btw. Zero tolerance has to mean zero tolerance, and sometimes you have to just say no before it starts, the reaction of her supporters has been telling. I actually have no particular dog in this fight. I am a Green Party member. I have read the article, I have read several, but not in one of those articles has there been any Anti-Semitism. Just criticism of the state of Israel. And if people are saying that criticism of Israel = anti-Semitic, then criticism of African states is racist and criticism of, say, Saudi Arabia is Islamophobic, and so on.
|
|
|
Post by FloreatShrew on Jun 26, 2020 9:00:28 GMT 1
I suppose you're gonna say the real reason is she's a "threat" to Keir? Read the article again please btw. Zero tolerance has to mean zero tolerance, and sometimes you have to just say no before it starts, the reaction of her supporters has been telling. I actually have no particular dog in this fight. I am a Green Party member. I have read the article, I have read several, but not in one of those articles has there been any Anti-Semitism. Just criticism of the state of Israel. And if people are saying that criticism of Israel = anti-Semitic, then criticism of African states is racist and criticism of, say, Saudi Arabia is Islamophobic, and so on. So what's the reason then? And I don't think you have, otherwise you'd have seen what's been quoted above and worked it out. She's got form of allowing this to happen and not calling it out.
|
|
|
Post by neilsalop on Jun 26, 2020 9:02:16 GMT 1
I get your point, but why not say that then? Saying it's Anti-Semitic, when it clearly isn't is, in my opinion, more dangerous and wrong. It's dangerous and wrong, because Israel denied using such techniques as a knee in the throat, despite the evidence. But, Starmer and the Labour Party are surprisingly silent on that. Surprisingly, because Starmer is a former human rights lawyer. Just sack her for the real reason. I suppose you're gonna say the real reason is she's a "threat" to Keir? Read the article again please btw. Zero tolerance has to mean zero tolerance, and sometimes you have to just say no before it starts, the reaction of her supporters has been telling. Is that zero tolerance to anti-Semitism which I accept or zero tolerance to critism of the Israeli government and security forces?
The Iranian government is known to be brutal and unfair, as is the Saudi leadership, is criticism of them anti-Islamic?
The treatment of the Rohingyan population in Myanmar has been nothing short of barbaric, would criticism of the government there be seen as anti-Bhuddist?
Indian troops regularly commit human rights violations in Kashmir and Jammu, would criticising the Modi governments part in this be seen as anti-Hindu?
|
|
|
Post by FloreatShrew on Jun 26, 2020 9:09:51 GMT 1
I suppose you're gonna say the real reason is she's a "threat" to Keir? Read the article again please btw. Zero tolerance has to mean zero tolerance, and sometimes you have to just say no before it starts, the reaction of her supporters has been telling. Is that zero toelance to anti-Semitism which I accept or zero tolerance to critism of the Israeli government and security forces?
The Iranian government is known to be brutal and unfair, as is the Saudi leadership, is criticism of them anti-Islamic?
The treatment of the Rohingyan population in Myanmar has been nothing short of barbaric, would criticism of the government there be seen as anti-Bhuddist?
Indian troops regularly commit human rights violations in Kashmir and Jammu, would criticising the Modi governments part in this be seen as anti-Hindu?
Nice whataboutery there. No. But to deal with this case specifically, calling out Israel as a causer of tragic high emotional events which they've nothing to do with as a stick to beat them with with no context given to the roles other groups do play, pushing a false angle agenda to make what is a right cause of a free Palestine look better is lazy as hell and only serves to divide and by it's nature of being is anti Semitic. I don't like the way Israel polices Palestinians, but what the hell has that to do with the Americans? It's lazy and that breeds hate and if Keir said zero tolerance, then he has to show and stand by zero tolerance.
|
|
|
Post by neilsalop on Jun 26, 2020 9:17:43 GMT 1
Is that zero toelance to anti-Semitism which I accept or zero tolerance to critism of the Israeli government and security forces?
The Iranian government is known to be brutal and unfair, as is the Saudi leadership, is criticism of them anti-Islamic?
The treatment of the Rohingyan population in Myanmar has been nothing short of barbaric, would criticism of the government there be seen as anti-Bhuddist?
Indian troops regularly commit human rights violations in Kashmir and Jammu, would criticising the Modi governments part in this be seen as anti-Hindu?
Nice whataboutery there. No. But to deal with this case specifically, calling out Israel as a causer of tragic high emotional events which they've nothing to do with as a stick to beat them with with no context given to the roles other groups do play, pushing a false angle agenda to make what is a right cause of a free Palestine look better is lazy as hell and only serves to divide and by it's nature of being is anti Semitic. I don't like the way Israel polices Palestinians, but what the hell has that to do with the Americans? It's lazy and that breeds hate and if Keir said zero tolerance, then he has to show and stand by zero tolerance. Whataboutery?
I asked you a question? Should zero tolerance be to anti-Semitism which I accept or zero tolerance to critism of the Israeli government and security forces?
You seem to have missed it.
I am an athiest and hold all religion in equal contempt. Does that make me an anti-Semite?
|
|
|
Post by shrewder on Jun 26, 2020 9:20:47 GMT 1
Not being committed to any particular political party means you are never tempted to defend the indefensible. In addition where is is deserved you are free to praise any political party.
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Jun 26, 2020 9:38:04 GMT 1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2020 9:40:55 GMT 1
I actually have no particular dog in this fight. I am a Green Party member. I have read the article, I have read several, but not in one of those articles has there been any Anti-Semitism. Just criticism of the state of Israel. And if people are saying that criticism of Israel = anti-Semitic, then criticism of African states is racist and criticism of, say, Saudi Arabia is Islamophobic, and so on. So what's the reason then? And I don't think you have, otherwise you'd have seen what's been quoted above and worked it out. She's got form of allowing this to happen and not calling it out. Maxine Peake propagated an anti-Israeli conspiracy theory. Just because the state of Israel is a majority Jewish state, doesn't make it anti-Semitic. Like I said, that would make criticism of dodgy African states racist and criticism of Middle-eastern states Islamophobic. This is why this is dangerous. She should have been sacked for sharing a half-baked theory, and for inflaming an already emotive subject. Basically, Starmer is dog-whistling, just like the Government. Status quo maintained. And I will add this. Of course, there is Anti-Semitism in the Labour Party, just like there's Islamophobia in the Tory Party, but the narrative was about how 'rampant' it was in the Labour Party and that was the stick to beat Corbyn with. Meanwhile, while no is looking, Israel continues to abuse the human riughts of Palestinians, and any criticism is automatically deemed anti-Semitic.
|
|
|
Post by FloreatShrew on Jun 26, 2020 9:49:25 GMT 1
Nice whataboutery there. No. But to deal with this case specifically, calling out Israel as a causer of tragic high emotional events which they've nothing to do with as a stick to beat them with with no context given to the roles other groups do play, pushing a false angle agenda to make what is a right cause of a free Palestine look better is lazy as hell and only serves to divide and by it's nature of being is anti Semitic. I don't like the way Israel polices Palestinians, but what the hell has that to do with the Americans? It's lazy and that breeds hate and if Keir said zero tolerance, then he has to show and stand by zero tolerance. Whataboutery?
I asked you a question? Should zero tolerance be to anti-Semitism which I accept or zero tolerance to critism of the Israeli government and security forces?
You seem to have missed it.
I am an athiest and hold all religion in equal contempt. Does that make me an anti-Semite?
You listed examples with nothing to do with the matter we're talking about. None of those countries have been now linked to the killing of blacks in America. It's zero tolerance to anti semitism. Which that article was pushing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2020 10:00:02 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by sheltonsalopian on Jun 26, 2020 10:23:53 GMT 1
Bold move by Keir, one I completely agree with as well. You've got the left of the party up in arms but they never cared about elect-ability if it affected the purity of the party. Sometimes you have to make tough decisions to appeal to the wider part of the electorate and showing no sign of weakness on antisemitism means it can no longer be used as a slur against Labour.
Keir and his advisers are a completely different political beast compared to Corbyn (Who I voted for) and his teams. Going to make for a very interesting 2024 election.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Jun 26, 2020 10:45:45 GMT 1
Is that zero toelance to anti-Semitism which I accept or zero tolerance to critism of the Israeli government and security forces?
The Iranian government is known to be brutal and unfair, as is the Saudi leadership, is criticism of them anti-Islamic?
The treatment of the Rohingyan population in Myanmar has been nothing short of barbaric, would criticism of the government there be seen as anti-Bhuddist?
Indian troops regularly commit human rights violations in Kashmir and Jammu, would criticising the Modi governments part in this be seen as anti-Hindu?
Nice whataboutery there. No. But to deal with this case specifically, calling out Israel as a causer of tragic high emotional events which they've nothing to do with as a stick to beat them with with no context given to the roles other groups do play, pushing a false angle agenda to make what is a right cause of a free Palestine look better is lazy as hell and only serves to divide and by it's nature of being is anti Semitic. I don't like the way Israel polices Palestinians, but what the hell has that to do with the Americans? It's lazy and that breeds hate and if Keir said zero tolerance, then he has to show and stand by zero tolerance. There’s no whataboutery in someone making valid comparisons in support of their point. Whataboutery is an attempt to change the subject, which neilsalop clearly wasn’t doing. I agree that it would be wrong to hold Israel responsible for something in which it had no part - and I don’t know enough about the facts here to comment on that. But anti-Semitic ‘by its nature’? Why? Can an aspect of a nation state not be criticised without that automatically being a racist attack on its people? That seems at least as lazy a connection to make as that of which you’re accusing others.
|
|