Labour's anti Semitic problems.

[Guest MattP]

Oh come off it, how can you even say that with a straight face? Such sweeping statements are ludicrous.

 

Whether you like it or not, a lot of people on the right are racist.

Whether you like it or not, a lot of people on the right are murderers and rapists.

Whether you like it or not, a lot of people on the right have sex with under-age children.

 

The statements above are just as true as the ones that you made. When you're talking about a large body of people, some of these things will undoubably be applicable to most groups (especially as 'a lot' is an unquantifiable number). That doesn't mean it's a popular opinion or endemic within the party. Saying "whether you like it or not" before hand doesn't make it anymore true either.

 

I don't think I've ever actually said that (though for what it's worth, I take whatever they write with a mountain of salt, but I extend that cynicism to most newspapers). 

 

I also don't actually believe in the whole pig-gate incident either (or if it happened, it's drastically overblown; student engaged in boisterous shenanigans, big deal). I think, however, you missed the point somewhat; the headline itself is irrelevant, I was just showing how absolutely ridiculous it is to pin an isolated incident on a party as a whole. It could easily be replaced with paedophilia or any other number of slanders. Click bait, pure and simple.

 

You're trying far too hard to find sticks to beat the Labour Party with, and it's coming off as quite desperate. You're becoming the right-wing Rincewind (sorry Ken).

 

You go on like it's a secret, these allegations towards the hard left have been around for years, the anti Zionist/Israel thing has often been used as a front for anti-semitism, we can just see it more clearly now given the recent surge in membership in support of the new leader, when you have appointed a leader like this you'll face questions, I'm sure the Tories would face serious questions about certain things if they had appointed Enoch Powell as leader.

 

If the right had a problem with these things I'd want whoever it was to try and tackle them, I'd be disgusted if people were turning a blind eye in the same way you are now. If a right winger involved in a group I was with tried to organised deliberate harrassment of people based on their religion or race I'd want some pretty serious action taken against them, I certainly wouldn't see it as good enough if the response was just that other people are racist as well.

 

Ironically your post here pretty much falls into line with everything Dan Hodges is talking about, the left has a problem, let's just shrug, ignore it and when challenged just claim that other people have problems too. So many people in the Labout party are calling out on this, do you really think it's all a fantasy or propaganda of the right?

 

And believe me you really don't have to look hard to find sticks to beat Labour with these days.

 

It's the one form of prejudice that elements on the left are willing to turn a blind eye to, you see it all over Social Media, phoney progressives, that say antisemitism is either a Zionist excuse to silence criticism of Israel and even that Jews need to openly condemn Israel if they don't want to face abuse and intimidation.

You'll never hear them saying all Muslims must condemn ISIS and Hamas if they want to be free from bigotry and hate. Rightly so.

The left does have a growing problem with antisemitism. It's continuing to grow as well. Particularly as many people continue to cuddle up with Islamists and anti-globalisation conspiracy theorists.

[Guest MattP]

The question the party really needs to ask itself is why they attracting so many of these sorts these days.

 

Is it the link between the tin foil hat brigade and the Corbynistas who believe in the Worldwide Jewish controlled consipracies theories? Is it the cuddling upto the Islamists in some very dubious forms ie Rotherham/gender segregated rallies, a community which clearly has issues with the Jews arising from the Middle East?

 

Whatever it is it has be addressed, as John says it's worrying so many Jews are starting to feel unsafe in Europe again, I don't want that to happen here as well.

 

I've said more than enough I think and I can tell I'm getting on people's nerves so I'll see you all next week.

[Strokes]

Really?

I perhaps could of phrased that better but I'm just trying to understand why they are always victims of persecution, you can go back to the dawn of time to find persecuted Jews. There has got to be something that separates them from certain communities.

[Thracian]

An interesting read from ex-Labour party member Dan Hodges for anyone who has been following the Labour/Oxford row over the last two weeks, this element of the party that has always been there really appears to have grown over the last 6 months or so.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/12161216/Is-the-Labour-Partys-problem-with-racism-beyond-repair.html

It's ironic that Labour is being increasingly supported by people of other races yet is embroiled in controversy over the alleged racism against people many of their new members have long been schooled into hating.

The source or that hatred goes back a long way, at least to the time of Hitler.

As I've said, we need a new "Labour" Party, one that genuinely represents the interests and wellbeing of the UK and its indigenous or genuinely adoptive workers rather than the trojan horses who would seek to advance their own cause from within the current set-up.

[Buce]

It's ironic that Labour is being increasingly supported by people of other races yet is embroiled in controversy over the alleged racism against people many of their new members have long been schooled into hating.

The source or that hatred goes back a long way, at least to the time of Hitler.

As I've said, we need a new "Labour" Party, one that genuinely represents the interests and wellbeing of the UK and its indigenous or genuinely adoptive workers rather than the trojan horses who would seek to advance their own cause from within the current set-up.

How about you define 'indigenous' for us?

[MC Prussian]

How about you define 'indigenous' for us?

 

Anyone with a Celtic, Anglo-Saxon, Roman or Norse heritage, I suppose.

 

Oh wait, they are or were all bloody foreigners!

[Buce]

Anyone with a Celtic, Anglo-Saxon, Roman or Norse heritage, I suppose.

Oh wait, they are or were all bloody foreigners!

I think Indigenous, in this case, is being used in the same way that Nick Griffin uses it - a euphemism for 'white and Christian'.

[MC Prussian]

I think Indigenous, in this case, is being used in the same way that Nick Griffin uses it - a euphemism for 'white and Christian'.

 

Which is basically just another way of dodging the question. Most indigenous people were settlers before Christianity came along, but don't let the detractors avoid the issue.

[Rincewind]

Oh come off it, how can you even say that with a straight face? Such sweeping statements are ludicrous.

 

Whether you like it or not, a lot of people on the right are racist.

Whether you like it or not, a lot of people on the right are murderers and rapists.

Whether you like it or not, a lot of people on the right have sex with under-age children.

 

The statements above are just as true as the ones that you made. When you're talking about a large body of people, some of these things will undoubably be applicable to most groups (especially as 'a lot' is an unquantifiable number). That doesn't mean it's a popular opinion or endemic within the party. Saying "whether you like it or not" before hand doesn't make it anymore true either.

 

 

I don't think I've ever actually said that (though for what it's worth, I take whatever they write with a mountain of salt, but I extend that cynicism to most newspapers). 

 

I also don't actually believe in the whole pig-gate incident either (or if it happened, it's drastically overblown; student engaged in boisterous shenanigans, big deal). I think, however, you missed the point somewhat; the headline itself is irrelevant, I was just showing how absolutely ridiculous it is to pin an isolated incident on a party as a whole. It could easily be replaced with paedophilia or any other number of slanders. Click bait, pure and simple.

 

You're trying far too hard to find sticks to beat the Labour Party with, and it's coming off as quite desperate. You're becoming the right-wing Rincewind (sorry Ken).

Its OK I am enjoying this thread with all the generalisations and stereotyping. We do not have an anti-Labour thread, we now have an anti-Labour section all to itself. Anything negative about Labour  is fair game but if anyone points out the failings of Tory's it is deemed as loony left propaganda. I find it funny. I prefer just to read the posts nowadays. 

Keep up the humour.

I am actually not as left wing as some make out. My view are based on Humanist values. I am not fond of scapegoating and the 'I'm alright Jack' attitude that seems to have increased in recent years. All parties have been to blame for encouraging people to act this way. But that is just me. I have always defended the vulnerable. I do not see that as being loony or leftist. Just being a human being.

[Thracian]

Just another case of a group of nasty people hiding behind their politics to veil their bigoted views to me.

 

The article seems to report the bottom of the party ladder with the Oxford case, fair enough it's awful. Then goes on to mention the peak of the party by saying Jeremy Corbyn talked to Hamas, who are obviosly going to be the biggest anti-semites going, to sensationalise the story to saying the whole party is racist conveniently leaving out the middle of the party who Hodges hasn't mentioned. If he found evidence of institutionalised racism within the town and city Labour candidates, councilors, core party administration and PLP then maybe he'd have a point but he's conveniantly filled the gap for himself, in my view.

You may be right but it would sure make me wonder about the views of Labour councillors in many communities where councils are represented by councillors from countries whose people have often expressed a hatred of jews and even whose faith representatives have expressed such a hatred.

This is a long article I found at random but it does give considerable insight into something I've read about on several occasions through different avenues.

plahttp://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=764

[Thracian]

It doesn't matter who wrote it buddy, I just think your much smarter than to re-peddle such propaganda and get hooked into the activities of minority groups who use wider politics as a vehicle to peddle their hate.

Perhaps you need to do more reading.

And perhaps the British Labour Party needs to be careful who it enrols as friends however desperate they might be for power.

The concept of an Islamic caliphate has nothing to do with the concept of a national democracy and I still find it hard to see how anyone who supports such a caliphitic ideal could find peace masquerading as the supporter of any party that is not administered according to Islamic principles except for their own ends.

Indeed I don't think it would be allowed except as a means to an end. Perhaps there are those on here who could correct my misunderstanding?

[Sharpe's Fox]

You may be right but it would sure make me wonder about the views of Labour councillors in many communities where councils are represented by councillors from countries whose people have often expressed a hatred of jews and even whose faith representatives have expressed such a hatred.This is a long article I found at random but it does give considerable insight into something I've read about on several occasions through different avenues.plahttp://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=764

Why are linking that article in reply to my post? Muslim councillors from Anglo-Pakistani communities in 2016 have nothing to do with Egyptian Muslims in the 1930's.

[Thracian]

It doesn't matter who wrote it buddy, I just think your much smarter than to re-peddle such propaganda and get hooked into the activities of minority groups who use wider politics as a vehicle to peddle their hate.

Unfortunately those "minority groups" seem to be getting bigger and more influential. Today's Labour Party is more threat to this country now than an asset. There needs to be a new concept. The Labour Party we've got now is beyond saving if it's even worth the effort of anyone trying.

[Claridge]

Unfortunately those "minority groups" seem to be getting bigger and more influential. Today's Labour Party is more threat to this country now than an asset. There needs to be a new concept. The Labour Party we've got now is beyond saving if it's even worth the effort of anyone trying.

 

Didn't realise the labour party was still around.

Not heard anyone really mention their views on anything important for months. 

I thought it would of been impossible to be worse than Milliband, but Corbyn is in a different league.

[Guest MattP]

Didn't realise the labour party was still around.

Not heard anyone really mention their views on anything important for months. 

I thought it would of been impossible to be worse than Milliband, but Corbyn is in a different league.

 

They'll still be the main opposition, but yeah they are becoming a bit irrelevant, even the EU ref is turning into Boris v Cameron, I don't think anyone outside his own echo chamber was remotly interested in what Corbyn had to say.

 

I heard Alan Johnson speak quite brilliantly at times yesterday, moderate, sensible, articulate, humorous, everything a politician should be. He's now a symbol of what Labour has lost, a cruel reminder of a more credible past. It's now ironic a man who despite being a sure winner who repeatedly ruled himself out of running for the leadership would probably struggle to get elected with a surge of hard left membership.

 

If the Tories play this right the division could show them in a decent light to the public, voters on either side of the ref vote could still see a party prepared to put it's country above itself by allowing people freedom of thought to campaign on an issue that also divides the country, Labour could be making exactly the same mistake as Scotland, showing themselves as a party who daren't step away from the norm, a party where almost everyone has to think the same and a party almost admitting it can't run the country by itself and crucially being aligned with the Tory leadership.

[Thracian]

Why are linking that article in reply to my post? Muslim councillors from Anglo-Pakistani communities in 2016 have nothing to do with Egyptian Muslims in the 1930's.

I don't think anything's changed, or is likely to change, in terms of Muslim views concerning Jews.

I have no flag to fly for Jews (Apart from my former cricket captain, who became Chairman of the Bar I've hardly spoken to any, as I'm aware of).

But Hamas is a tireless aggressor and antagonist in Israel with miles of tunnels built specifically to store weapons intended to continue the fight against the Jews. And when one hears comment about Muslim restraint I'd actually doubt the Muslims have stopped fighting someone or another since their faith was born centuries back.

There's no right or wrong anymore, just hatred. Rid the world of non-private religion and you might be halfway towards a potential multi-national peace plan.

Otherwise the death toll in the name of religion will just continue to grow and it's already obscene.

http://en.mehrnews.com/news/114699/Arab-vs-non-Arab-conflicts-set-up-by-Imperialism-to-destroy?

[Thracian]

I wonder why the Jewish community are throughout history always victims of racism, what are they doing that isolates themselves from others so much?

I look forward to the answer. I've never understood it either.

[Thracian]

How about you define 'indigenous' for us?

Haha - it's a description I try to avoid now because it's meaning is somewhat nebulous even according to dictionary definitions.

But people who originate in an area and have a specific connection to it, I suppose.

Like the aborigines of Australia.

Quite how long family has to evolve in a place before becoming indigenous I'm not sure.

I suppose if a family worked for generations on the London docks they'd eventually be classed as indigenous.

Many generations of belonging to an area (or country) seems to be the general understanding nowadays but I'm sure some academic in here would take issue with me.

[Thracian]

Didn't realise the labour party was still around.

Not heard anyone really mention their views on anything important for months. 

I thought it would of been impossible to be worse than Milliband, but Corbyn is in a different league.

Says it all really in terms of what they've become.

But some people are born into the Labour movement the same way others are born into a particular religion or football team. It's hard to knock it in some ways.

Labour used to stand for something worthwhile but lately it's become more a threat to the nation than a force for good.

But there's still hope. Only if Rincey and Alf check out will you know they've finally had it!

[Thracian]

They'll still be the main opposition, but yeah they are becoming a bit irrelevant, even the EU ref is turning into Boris v Cameron, I don't think anyone outside his own echo chamber was remotly interested in what Corbyn had to say.

Haha, with Corbyn I wouldn't be surprised if he just spins a coin and plays that Hokey Cokey song .... "In, Out, In, Out, shake it all about".

Imagine him leading the country! We'd be driving on the right one week, on the left the next. Maybe he'd have us driving in reverse too - in fact I'm pretty sure of it! 'Til Soulsby said he didn't want us driving at all - at least in his city!

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/17/jeremy-corbyn-labour-campaign-for-uk-stay-in-eu

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/604676/Jeremy-Corbyn-voted-leave-Europe-1975

[Thracian]

Why are linking that article in reply to my post? Muslim councillors from Anglo-Pakistani communities in 2016 have nothing to do with Egyptian Muslims in the 1930's.

Who says they don't? Muslim philosophy is borderless and the Muslim Brotherhood connects with many countries and has done for generations.

There are many articles similar to the link I posted, some even detailing the West's involvement and Afghan aspects.

[Guest MattP]

Don't know if anyone watched but they had Gerry Downing on the Daily Politics yesterday, he's the guy Cameron questioned Corbyn about at PMQ's having rejoined Labour, he's a hard left activist who believes the 9/11 bombers should never be condemned and is aligned to a group who support Islamic State against the West and think they should be provided with military support.

 

If you are going to try and claim you don't defend anti-semitism you shouldn't really be inviting people who say things like "we need to talk about Jewish question" on television into the party, he's been kicked out according to the press now (although he says himself he hasn't) but the fact Corbyn's Labour is the choice for this man says quite a lot.

[Alf Bentley]

Don't know if anyone watched but they had Gerry Downing on the Daily Politics yesterday, he's the guy Cameron questioned Corbyn about at PMQ's having rejoined Labour, he's a hard left activist who believes the 9/11 bombers should never be condemned and is aligned to a group who support Islamic State against the West and think they should be provided with military support.

 

If you are going to try and claim you don't defend anti-semitism you shouldn't really be inviting people who say things like "we need to talk about Jewish question" on television into the party, he's been kicked out according to the press now (although he says himself he hasn't) but the fact Corbyn's Labour is the choice for this man says quite a lot.

 

 

I learned a new word the other day: Swiftboating:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiftboating

"The term swiftboating (also spelled swift-boating or swift boating) is an American neologism used pejoratively to describe an unfair or untrue political attack. The term is derived from the name of the organization "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" (SBVT, later theSwift Vets and POWs for Truth) because of their widely publicized—and then discredited—campaign against 2004 U.S. Presidential candidate John Kerry.^[1][2][3][4]

Since the political smear campaign^{[2][5][6][7][8]} conducted by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth against John Kerry, the term "swiftboating" has come into common use to refer to a harsh attack by a political opponent that is dishonest, personal, and unfair.^[9][10] The Swift Boat Veterans and media pundits objected to this use of the term to define a smear campaign"

 

Don't know what could have made me think of that at this point in time.... 

 

Edit: I'm going out shortly, so in case you come back to point out that your accusation about this bloke is true.... It may well be true, as all large organisations have dodgy members/associates: e.g. this Tory bod who's alleged to have bullied someone to the point of suicide, Aitken & Archer going to jail for crimes of dishonesty, individual UKIP representatives being revealed to be blatant racists etc. However, only a smear-oriented propagandist spends large amounts of time publicising the misdeeds of such individuals. The obvious purpose is to smear the larger organisation by association with a particular dodgy individual.

 

Thing is, I'm unclear on whose behalf you spread all these smears and all this propaganda. Are you a member of any particular Right-wing organisation seeking to benefit from the Labour Party or other lefties being smeared by association? I know you've said that you have campaigned for a particular UKIP councillor but you've never really clarified your present or past political affiliations. Are you really just a private, unaffiliated individual who chooses to spend vast amounts of time smearing the Left or are you surreptitiously doing this on behalf of some right-wing faction?

[Buce]

I learned a new word the other day: Swiftboating:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiftboating

"The term swiftboating (also spelled swift-boating or swift boating) is an American neologism used pejoratively to describe an unfair or untrue political attack. The term is derived from the name of the organization "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" (SBVT, later theSwift Vets and POWs for Truth) because of their widely publicized—and then discredited—campaign against 2004 U.S. Presidential candidate John Kerry.^[1][2][3][4]

Since the political smear campaign^{[2][5][6][7][8]} conducted by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth against John Kerry, the term "swiftboating" has come into common use to refer to a harsh attack by a political opponent that is dishonest, personal, and unfair.^[9][10] The Swift Boat Veterans and media pundits objected to this use of the term to define a smear campaign"

Don't know what could have made me think of that at this point in time....

That's my Word of the Day sorted.

Thanks, Alf.

[Guest MattP]

Don't know what could have made me think of that at this point in time.... 

 

Edit: I'm going out shortly, so in case you come back to point out that your accusation about this bloke is true.... It may well be true, as all large organisations have dodgy members/associates: e.g. this Tory bod who's alleged to have bullied someone to the point of suicide, Aitken & Archer going to jail for crimes of dishonesty, individual UKIP representatives being revealed to be blatant racists etc. However, only a smear-oriented propagandist spends large amounts of time publicising the misdeeds of such individuals. The obvious purpose is to smear the larger organisation by association with a particular dodgy individual.

 

Thing is, I'm unclear on whose behalf you spread all these smears and all this propaganda. Are you a member of any particular Right-wing organisation seeking to benefit from the Labour Party or other lefties being smeared by association? I know you've said that you have campaigned for a particular UKIP councillor but you've never really clarified your present or past political affiliations. Are you really just a private, unaffiliated individual who chooses to spend vast amounts of time smearing the Left or are you surreptitiously doing this on behalf of some right-wing faction?

 

Oh come on mate, you seem to think every single thing directed at the Labour party is a smear these days, how about the party actually takes some responsibility for it's people? No one (yourself included) seemed to have a single problem with any of this when it was UKIP memebers being splattered all over the front pages before the election last year for saying far milder things.

 

It's perfectly reasonable to bring this up, the bloke was mentioned by the Prime Minister himself at PMQ's and yesterday he was invited on as a guest to the Daily Politics to discuss his situation, he openly stated he was welcomed back into the party, people knew about the things he had said and the organisations he was involved with, if I really wanted to smear I'd be also be whacking up the picture they showed of him sitting with the shadow chancellor, this defence of everything is a smear becoming pathetic now and seems to be reaching all sides of the Labour party. .

 

And for what it's worth the "Tatler Tory" should be talked about just as much (and has been in the media I've read) - It's a total stain on the party and needs to be seriously dealt with, everyone who was involved needs to be kicked out and I would hope no Tory member or supporter would try and brush it off as a scare or smear whilst wanting to do nothing about it.

 

I'm not denying I'm biased at all, but we are all are, when was the last time you attacked Ken on here for consistently smearing the Tories with often totally made up memes or information? I find it hard to believe you would let that go so consistenly were it me or Webbo posting it.