Edited extra bit: you're also neglecting that everyone I've seen here, from all sides, has condemned the Windrush scandal.
We're all opposed to anti-semitism. In my opinion the people who are using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage are the ones who need to look at themselves in the mirror.
No we aren't. I know I am. I don't know if you are, but I know that many people in your party aren't (and I know that because Corbyn has admitted it), so you might very well not be. I also know I am not using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage, because I was exactly as appalled by the antics of Aidan Burley as I am by those of your fellow party members. It may become legitimate in a couple of years time for you to complain that people keep harping on about Labour's former antisemitism problem, but there ain't nothing former about it at the moment. So suck it up, deal with it and stop whining.
Labour isn't my party. I've just spotted that this whole anti-semitism thing is being orchestrated by their enemies.
Are you really so thick that you don’t understand that this is what political enemies do?
These are the rules of the game, pretty much worldwide.
Your political enemies find the weakest spot and attack. Your job is to defend your week flank.
It would have been easy for Labour to deal with this in April 2016 with a proper report . They prevaricated. They screwed up.
The Tories are not my party, but if they allow the Windrush Affair to drag on for two years, they will be screwed.
"It would have been easy for Labour to deal with this in April 2016 with a proper report . They prevaricated. They screwed up. "
Yup. And they were punished by the country in June 2016!!
The definition of anti-Semitism itself has been expanded. Palestinians [ indeed all Arabs ] are now excluded even though they speak a semitic language.
The new definition is: criticism of Israel and its actions is anti-Semitic. Sadly, that's where we are. Palestinians get shot and nothing happens.........
Well, there seems to be a lot of confusion and misinformation over the Wadsworth/Smeeth affair. As far as I can tell the position appears to be this:-
1. One of the recommendations of the Chakrabati Report (launched in June 2016) was that religious or racial tropes or stereotypes about groups of people should have no place in the modern Labour Party. 2. During the Q&A session following the launch, Wadsworth accused Ruth Smeeth of working “hand in hand” with the Telegraph about accusations of anti-semitism within Labour. This was part of a complaint he made about “media hostility” during which he accused Kate McCann, a Telegraph reporter of being a “troublemaker” and “racist” as part of the “witchhunt media”. 3. This upset her at the time and she made the following statement after the launch: “This morning, at the launch of the Chakrabarti Inquiry into antisemitism, I was verbally attacked by a Momentum activist and Jeremy Corbyn supporter who used traditional antisemitic slurs to attack me for being part of a 'media conspiracy'. It is beyond belief that someone could come to the launch of a report on antisemitism in the Labour Party and espouse such vile conspiracy theories about Jewish people, which were ironically highlighted as such in Ms Chakrabarti's report, while the leader of my own party stood by and did absolutely nothing.” 4. The Wadsworth accusation against Ms Smeeth might not have been a problem had there been evidence to back up his statements. 5. In the absence of such evidence, then it would appear to be a smear which might be understood to mean that a Jewish Labour MP was making up allegations of anti-semitism and/or using them as part of some campaign by a part of the press which did not support Labour in order to damage Labour. If that was the implication, then it was (and is) a pretty serious accusation to make against a Labour MP: to accuse her of deliberately setting out to damage her party. 6. Presumably Wadsworth was asked during his disciplinary hearing what evidence he had to support his statements about Ms Smeeth. We must assume from the outcome that no such evidence was provided. If so, then the hearing would have had to consider whether his unfounded allegation brought – or risked bringing – the Labour Party into disrepute. Clearly the panel hearing the evidence thought that it did. (If there was such evidence and it was credible and the panel ignored it, then they will be in trouble.)
7. The fact that Wadsworth is black and campaigned for the Lawrence family is irrelevant to whether he should be disciplined. The Daily Mail probably did more than Marc Wadsworth ever did to ensure a public inquiry and a change in the law to ensure that some of Stephen’s killers were brought to justice but that does not mean that they are – or should be – immune from criticism. The same applies to Wadsworth and any other anti-racism campaigner. 8. Similarly, the fact that Ms Smeeth was upset and is Jewish does not mean that she is exempt from criticism. If what Wadsworth had said about her was true then the fact that she is Jewish/was upset is irrelevant.
Presumably all those now contributing to Wadsworth’s appeal fund etc know and have the necessary evidence to show that he was justified in what he said. And will share it with the appeal panel.
Otherwise, it does look as if some are doing what the estimable Mr Meeks counselled against a few days ago: “Be especially sceptical of information that produces a strong emotional response from you. Ask yourself who wants to produce that response.”
Nick P is right. Some members are just more trouble than they're worth.
Maybe. But, then the Lyndon B. Johnson Tent argument comes into play.
Is a disgruntled Wadsworth -- perceived by neutrals to have been badly treated and launching legal action -- worse than a gruntled Wadsworth merely being rude to Ruth Smeeth?
Probably, it is.
The Labour Party should have picked on a very clear case -- like Nazi Shah MP -- and dealt with it. They seem to have compounded the original errors by picking on a dubious case (at least from what we know)..
I didn't realise till that tweet from Hodges that Ruth Smeeth used to work for BICOM. It is becoming more difficult by the day to split claims of antisemitism from the interests of the Israeli government which is really dangerous for Labour.
Mr. Borough, the incompetence of Fox is having a seriously detrimental affect upon the national interest.
I'm starting to think that the Tories may be absolutely slaughtered at GE 2022.
If Labour had a decent leadership team, that might well be the case.
They would be 20 points ahead under Yvette, but there you go. That boat has long sailed.
Corbyn may win by accident, swept into power by outrage at the mess of Brexit (food rotting at Dover, major companies laying off workers, trouble in NI etc etc).
she bottled it big time, and would have been a disaster in any case, another useless roaster.
Edited extra bit: you're also neglecting that everyone I've seen here, from all sides, has condemned the Windrush scandal.
We're all opposed to anti-semitism. In my opinion the people who are using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage are the ones who need to look at themselves in the mirror.
No we aren't. I know I am. I don't know if you are, but I know that many people in your party aren't (and I know that because Corbyn has admitted it), so you might very well not be. I also know I am not using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage, because I was exactly as appalled by the antics of Aidan Burley as I am by those of your fellow party members. It may become legitimate in a couple of years time for you to complain that people keep harping on about Labour's former antisemitism problem, but there ain't nothing former about it at the moment. So suck it up, deal with it and stop whining.
Labour isn't my party. I've just spotted that this whole anti-semitism thing is being orchestrated by their enemies.
Are you really so thick that you don’t understand that this is what political enemies do?
These are the rules of the game, pretty much worldwide.
Your political enemies find the weakest spot and attack. Your job is to defend your week flank.
It would have been easy for Labour to deal with this in April 2016 with a proper report . They prevaricated. They screwed up.
The Tories are not my party, but if they allow the Windrush Affair to drag on for two years, they will be screwed.
"It would have been easy for Labour to deal with this in April 2016 with a proper report . They prevaricated. They screwed up. "
Yup. And they were punished by the country in June 2016!!
The definition of anti-Semitism itself has been expanded. Palestinians [ indeed all Arabs ] are now excluded even though they speak a semitic language.
The new definition is: criticism of Israel and its actions is anti-Semitic. Sadly, that's where we are. Palestinians get shot and nothing happens.........
"Anti-semitism" was the politically correct term for Jew Hatred, which came into vogue in the late 19th century. It never encompassed Arabs.
I didn't realise till that tweet from Hodges that Ruth Smeeth used to work for BICOM. It is becoming more difficult by the day to split claims of antisemitism from the interests of the Israeli government which is really dangerous for Labour.
What is BICOM ? I need to look up Google.
Edit: I have just looked it up. I have no problem if a Jewish MP [ or any MP, for that matter ] support Israel. I would expect that. I would do it myself.
However, what I find unacceptable is they keep absolutely quiet when Palestinians [ who are under occupation for 51 years ] get shot and they keep absolutely stumm.
A Palestinian girl gets 8 months for slapping an Israeli soldier. Meanwhile an Israeli soldier gets 9 months for shooting dead a Palestinian teenager.
I didn't realise till that tweet from Hodges that Ruth Smeeth used to work for BICOM. It is becoming more difficult by the day to split claims of antisemitism from the interests of the Israeli government which is really dangerous for Labour.
What is BICOM ? I need to look up Google.
They're responsible for Israeli propaganda in the UK.
CBI not holding back anymore. Serious doubts on Fox:
"Britain's leading business group has "serious doubts" that the UK government will be able to fulfil its promise to roll-over Britain's 40 existing free trade deals with non-EU countries in time for Brexit, telling Business Insider that failure to do so could "wipe out" entire sectors of the economy.
UK International Trade Secretary Liam Fox has promised to roll-over Britain's existing deals with non-EU countries, as part of its EU membership, the "second after" Brexit.
However, the Confederation of British Industry has told BI that this is very unlikely to be possible, potentially leaving entire sectors of the economy on a "cliff-edge" after Brexit."
Edited extra bit: you're also neglecting that everyone I've seen here, from all sides, has condemned the Windrush scandal.
No we aren't. I know I am. I don't know if you are, but I know that many people in your party aren't (and I know that because Corbyn has admitted it), so you might very well not be. I also know I am not using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage, because I was exactly as appalled by the antics of Aidan Burley as I am by those of your fellow party members. It may become legitimate in a couple of years time for you to complain that people keep harping on about Labour's former antisemitism problem, but there ain't nothing former about it at the moment. So suck it up, deal with it and stop whining.
Labour isn't my party. I've just spotted that this whole anti-semitism thing is being orchestrated by their enemies.
Are you really so thick that you don’t understand that this is what political enemies do?
These are the rules of the game, pretty much worldwide.
Your political enemies find the weakest spot and attack. Your job is to defend your week flank.
It would have been easy for Labour to deal with this in April 2016 with a proper report . They prevaricated. They screwed up.
The Tories are not my party, but if they allow the Windrush Affair to drag on for two years, they will be screwed.
"It would have been easy for Labour to deal with this in April 2016 with a proper report . They prevaricated. They screwed up. "
Yup. And they were punished by the country in June 2016!!
The definition of anti-Semitism itself has been expanded. Palestinians [ indeed all Arabs ] are now excluded even though they speak a semitic language.
The new definition is: criticism of Israel and its actions is anti-Semitic. Sadly, that's where we are. Palestinians get shot and nothing happens.........
"Anti-semitism" was the politically correct term for Jew Hatred, which came into vogue in the late 19th century. It never encompassed Arabs.
I didn't realise till that tweet from Hodges that Ruth Smeeth used to work for BICOM. It is becoming more difficult by the day to split claims of antisemitism from the interests of the Israeli government which is really dangerous for Labour.
Meanwhile, more Palestinians get shot dead You can hear the condemnation ringing out NOT.
You are absolutely right about this last point.
Yarmouk, a Palestinian refugee camp near Damascus is facing a wide-scale military offensive & ethnic cleansing by the Syrian army & its allies.
Yarmouk camp was once home to some 160,000 Palestinians.
On April 19, the Syrian army and its allies, including the Russians, launched a massive offensive against Yarmouk.
Since then, 5,000 of the 6,000 residents left have fled, according to the United Nations & human rights organizations. Most of the camp's houses have been destroyed as a result of the fighting between the Syrian army and opposition groups that found shelter inside Yarmouk.
Yarmouk has been under the full siege of the Syrian army since 2013, a situation causing a humanitarian crisis. According to some reports, the situation is so bad that residents have been forced to eat dogs & cats to survive.
In the past few weeks, at least 15 Palestinians have been killed in airstrikes and artillery shelling on Yarmouk. According to the London-based Action Group for Palestinians of Syria, 3,722 Palestinians (including 465 women) have been killed since the civil war started. Another 1,675 are said to have been detained by the Syrian authorities; another 309 are listed as missing.
More than 200 of the Palestinian victims died because of the lack of food and medical care.
On April 24, Syrian & Russian warplanes carried out more than 85 airstrikes on Yarmouk camp and dropped 24 barrels of explosives; 24 rocket and dozens of missiles were fired at the camp.
A day earlier, Syrian & Russian warplanes launched 220 airstrikes on Yarmouk. The warplanes dropped 55 barrels of dynamite on the camp, also targeted with 108 rockets & missiles.
According to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), the conflict in Syria "continues to disrupt the lives of civilians, resulting in death and injuries, internal displacement, extensive damage to civilian infrastructure and persistent humanitarian needs. Affected communities suffer indiscriminate violence, restrictions on their freedom of movement and continued violations of international humanitarian and human rights law. Palestinians are among those worst affected by the conflict."
No doubt Corbyn will be vocal in condemning these violent attacks on defenceless Palestinian women and children.
Or is it only Palestinians killed by Israelis he is bothered about?
Edited extra bit: you're also neglecting that everyone I've seen here, from all sides, has condemned the Windrush scandal.
We're all opposed to anti-semitism. In my opinion the people who are using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage are the ones who need to look at themselves in the mirror.
Nam by those of your fellow party members. It may become legitimate in a couple of years time for you to complain that people keep harping on about Labour's former antisemitism problem, but there ain't nothing former about it at the moment. So suck it up, deal with it and stop whining.
Labour isn't my party. I've just spotted that this whole anti-semitism thing is being orchestrated by their enemies.
Are you really so thick that you don’t understand that this is what political enemies do?
These are the rules of the game, pretty much worldwide.
Your political enemies find the weakest spot and attack. Your job is to defend your week flank.
It would have been easy for Labour to deal with this in April 2016 with a proper report . They prevaricated. They screwed up.
The Tories are not my party, but if they allow the Windrush Affair to drag on for two years, they will be screwed.
"It would have been easy for Labour to deal with this in April 2016 with a proper report . They prevaricated. They screwed up. "
Yup. And they were punished by the country in June 2016!!
The definition of anti-Semitism itself has been expanded. Palestinians [ indeed all Arabs ] are now excluded even though they speak a semitic language.
The new definition is: criticism of Israel and its actions is anti-Semitic. Sadly, that's where we are. Palestinians get shot and nothing happens.........
"Anti-semitism" was the politically correct term for Jew Hatred, which came into vogue in the late 19th century. It never encompassed Arabs.
There were few Arabs in late nineteenth century Europe. When people like Dr. Karl Luger called themselves anti-semites, they weren't thinking about Arabs.
Edited extra bit: you're also neglecting that everyone I've seen here, from all sides, has condemned the Windrush scandal.
We're all opposed to anti-semitism. In my opinion the people who are using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage are the ones who need to look at themselves in the mirror.
No we aren't. I know I am. I don't know if you are, but I know that many people in your party aren't (and I know that because Corbyn has admitted it), so you might very well not be. I also know I am not using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage, because I was exactly as appalled by the antics of Aidan Burley as I am by those of your fellow party members. It may become legitimate in a couple of years time for you to complain that people keep harping on about Labour's former antisemitism problem, but there ain't nothing former about it at the moment. So suck it up, deal with it and stop whining.
Labour isn't my party. I've just spotted that this whole anti-semitism thing is being orchestrated by their enemies.
Edited extra bit: you're also neglecting that everyone I've seen here, from all sides, has condemned the Windrush scandal.
We're all opposed to anti-semitism. In my opinion the people who are using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage are the ones who need to look at themselves in the mirror.
Nam by those of your fellow party members. It may become legitimate in a couple of years time for you to complain that people keep harping on about Labour's former antisemitism problem, but there ain't nothing former about it at the moment. So suck it up, deal with it and stop whining.
Labour isn't my party. I've just spotted that this whole anti-semitism thing is being orchestrated by their enemies.
Are you really so thick that you don’t understand that this is what political enemies do?
These are the rules of the game, pretty much worldwide.
Your political enemies find the weakest spot and attack. Your job is to defend your week flank.
It would have been easy for Labour to deal with this in April 2016 with a proper report . They prevaricated. They screwed up.
The Tories are not my party, but if they allow the Windrush Affair to drag on for two years, they will be screwed.
"It would have been easy for Labour to deal with this in April 2016 with a proper report . They prevaricated. They screwed up. "
Yup. And they were punished by the country in June 2016!!
The definition of anti-Semitism itself has been expanded. Palestinians [ indeed all Arabs ] are now excluded even though they speak a semitic language.
The new definition is: criticism of Israel and its actions is anti-Semitic. Sadly, that's where we are. Palestinians get shot and nothing happens.........
"Anti-semitism" was the politically correct term for Jew Hatred, which came into vogue in the late 19th century. It never encompassed Arabs.
There were few Arabs in late nineteenth century Europe. When people like Dr. Karl Luger called themselves anti-semites, they weren't thinking about Arabs.
There was deep-seated anti-Muslim prejudice though.
Edited extra bit: you're also neglecting that everyone I've seen here, from all sides, has condemned the Windrush scandal.
We're all opposed to anti-semitism. In my opinion the people who are using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage are the ones who need to look at themselves in the mirror.
No we aren't. I know I am. I don't know if you are, but I know that many people in your party aren't (and I know that because Corbyn has admitted it), so you might very well not be. I also know I am not using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage, because I was exactly as appalled by the antics of Aidan Burley as I am by those of your fellow party members. It may become legitimate in a couple of years time for you to complain that people keep harping on about Labour's former antisemitism problem, but there ain't nothing former about it at the moment. So suck it up, deal with it and stop whining.
Labour isn't my party. I've just spotted that this whole anti-semitism thing is being orchestrated by their enemies.
No, the evidence that it is real is overwhelming. There is Corbyn's admission, for starters. Yes, other factions in the Labour party and others outside it are treating it as a point-and-laugh opportunity, but so what? If you put antisemitism, and taking party political advantage of antisemitism, in the same moral ballpark, I'm very happy to put you down as an antisemite.
Do you think anti-semitism is an accusation light enough to be bandied around with gay abandon like you have just done? It's clearly not a matter you take very seriously. At least Morris Dancer, who is almost totally wrong about nearly everything, was clear that anti-semitism can have pretty bad consequences.
I didn't realise till that tweet from Hodges that Ruth Smeeth used to work for BICOM. It is becoming more difficult by the day to split claims of antisemitism from the interests of the Israeli government which is really dangerous for Labour.
Meanwhile, more Palestinians get shot dead You can hear the condemnation ringing out NOT.
You are absolutely right about this last point.
Yarmouk, a Palestinian refugee camp near Damascus is facing a wide-scale military offensive & ethnic cleansing by the Syrian army & its allies.
Yarmouk camp was once home to some 160,000 Palestinians.
On April 19, the Syrian army and its allies, including the Russians, launched a massive offensive against Yarmouk.
Since then, ...Yarmouk.
Yarmouk has been under the full siege of the Syrian army since 2013, a situation causing a humanitarian crisis. According to some reports, the situation is so bad that residents have been forced to eat dogs & cats to survive.
In the past few weeks, at least 15 Palestinians have been killed in airstrikes and artillery shelling on Yarmouk. According to the London-based Action Group for Palestinians of Syria, 3,722 Palestinians (including 465 women) have been killed since the civil war started. Another 1,675 are said to have been detained by the Syrian authorities; another 309 are listed as missing.
More than 200 of the Palestinian victims died because of the lack of food and medical care.
On April 24, Syrian & Russian warplanes carried out more than 85 airstrikes on Yarmouk camp and dropped 24 barrels of explosives; 24 rocket and dozens of missiles were fired at the camp.
A day earlier, Syrian & Russian warplanes launched 220 airstrikes on Yarmouk. The warplanes dropped 55 barrels of dynamite on the camp, also targeted with 108 rockets & missiles.
According to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), the conflict in Syria "continues to disrupt the lives of civilians, resulting in death and injuries, internal displacement, extensive damage to civilian infrastructure and persistent humanitarian needs. Affected communities suffer indiscriminate violence, restrictions on their freedom of movement and continued violations of international humanitarian and human rights law. Palestinians are among those worst affected by the conflict."
No doubt Corbyn will be vocal in condemning these violent attacks on defenceless Palestinian women and children.
Or is it only Palestinians killed by Israelis he is bothered about?
You are absolutely right in condemning the Syrians regarding ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
Sadly, I must have missed your condemnation of Israeli army shooting dead Palestinians teenagers.
I didn't realise till that tweet from Hodges that Ruth Smeeth used to work for BICOM. It is becoming more difficult by the day to split claims of antisemitism from the interests of the Israeli government which is really dangerous for Labour.
I didn't realise till that tweet from Hodges that Ruth Smeeth used to work for BICOM. It is becoming more difficult by the day to split claims of antisemitism from the interests of the Israeli government which is really dangerous for Labour.
What is BICOM ? I need to look up Google.
They're responsible for Israeli propaganda in the UK.
Meanwhile, more Palestinians get shot dead You can hear the condemnation ringing out NOT.
You are absolutely right about this last point.
Yarmouk has been under the full siege of the Syrian army since 2013, a situation causing a humanitarian crisis. According to some reports, the situation is so bad that residents have been forced to eat dogs & cats to survive.
In the past few weeks, at least 15 Palestinians have been killed in airstrikes and artillery shelling on Yarmouk. According to the London-based Action Group for Palestinians of Syria, 3,722 Palestinians (including 465 women) have been killed since the civil war started. Another 1,675 are said to have been detained by the Syrian authorities; another 309 are listed as missing.
More than 200 of the Palestinian victims died because of the lack of food and medical care.
On April 24, Syrian & Russian warplanes carried out more than 85 airstrikes on Yarmouk camp and dropped 24 barrels of explosives; 24 rocket and dozens of missiles were fired at the camp.
A day earlier, Syrian & Russian warplanes launched 220 airstrikes on Yarmouk. The warplanes dropped 55 barrels of dynamite on the camp, also targeted with 108 rockets & missiles.
According to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), the conflict in Syria "continues to disrupt the lives of civilians, resulting in death and injuries, internal displacement, extensive damage to civilian infrastructure and persistent humanitarian needs. Affected communities suffer indiscriminate violence, restrictions on their freedom of movement and continued violations of international humanitarian and human rights law. Palestinians are among those worst affected by the conflict."
No doubt Corbyn will be vocal in condemning these violent attacks on defenceless Palestinian women and children.
Or is it only Palestinians killed by Israelis he is bothered about?
Apart from the apparent desire to attack anyone and everyone, what possible reason could the Syrian Government and their Russian allies have for attacking a Palestinian refugee camp?
Edited extra bit: you're also neglecting that everyone I've seen here, from all sides, has condemned the Windrush scandal.
We're all opposed to anti-semitism. In my opinion the people who are using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage are the ones who need to look at themselves in the mirror.
Nam by those of your fellow party members. It may become legitimate in a couple of years time for you to complain that people keep harping on about Labour's former antisemitism problem, but there ain't nothing former about it at the moment. So suck it up, deal with it and stop whining.
Labour isn't my party. I've just spotted that this whole anti-semitism thing is being orchestrated by their enemies.
Are you really so thick that you don’t understand that this is what political enemies do?
The
"It would have been easy for Labour to deal with this in April 2016 with a proper report . They prevaricated. They screwed up. "
Yup. And they were punished by the country in June 2016!!
The definition of anti-Semitism itself has been expanded. Palestinians [ indeed all Arabs ] are now excluded even though they speak a semitic language.
The new definition is: criticism of Israel and its actions is anti-Semitic. Sadly, that's where we are. Palestinians get shot and nothing happens.........
"Anti-semitism" was the politically correct term for Jew Hatred, which came into vogue in the late 19th century. It never encompassed Arabs.
There were few Arabs in late nineteenth century Europe. When people like Dr. Karl Luger called themselves anti-semites, they weren't thinking about Arabs.
There was deep-seated anti-Muslim prejudice though.
Anti-Muslim prejudice was pretty virulent in the Balkans, among people who hated the Ottoman Empire. But, it was much less of an issue in places like Austria or France where politicians identified as anti-semites.
Edited extra bit: you're also neglecting that everyone I've seen here, from all sides, has condemned the Windrush scandal.
We're all opposed to anti-semitism. In my opinion the people who are using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage are the ones who need to look at themselves in the mirror.
Nam by those of your fellow party members. It may become legitimate in a couple of years time for you to complain that people keep harping on about Labour's former antisemitism problem, but there ain't nothing former about it at the moment. So suck it up, deal with it and stop whining.
Labour isn't my party. I've just spotted that this whole anti-semitism thing is being orchestrated by their enemies.
Are you really so thick that you don’t understand that this is what political enemies do?
The
"It would have been easy for Labour to deal with this in April 2016 with a proper report . They prevaricated. They screwed up. "
Yup. And they were punished by the country in June 2016!!
The definition of anti-Semitism itself has been expanded. Palestinians [ indeed all Arabs ] are now excluded even though they speak a semitic language.
The new definition is: criticism of Israel and its actions is anti-Semitic. Sadly, that's where we are. Palestinians get shot and nothing happens.........
"Anti-semitism" was the politically correct term for Jew Hatred, which came into vogue in the late 19th century. It never encompassed Arabs.
There were few Arabs in late nineteenth century Europe. When people like Dr. Karl Luger called themselves anti-semites, they weren't thinking about Arabs.
There was deep-seated anti-Muslim prejudice though.
Anti-Muslim prejudice was pretty virulent in the Balkans, among people who hated the Ottoman Empire. But, it was much less of an issue in places like Austria or France where politicians identified as anti-semites.
That wasn’t prejudice. That was hatred of colonisers/overlords.
Far be it for me to interrupt opponents while they commit collective suicide, but whoever’s advising him needs to make a point of returning any donations with such clearly antisemitic messages attached - unless he’s happy for the first question in his appeal to be if he’s happy to take money from people who express such opinions.
Unfair if she does. The tone had been set by May who clearly looks the nastier piece of work at the moment. Malevolence is always less attractive than mere incompetence.
I'm bemused by your witch-sniffer general capability of detecting nastiness in the Conservatives, but utterly missing it when it occurs in the Labour party. It's quite a skill...
One seems to be about party activists censuring representatives for attending particular meetings. The other is about throwing ordinary people out of their jobs, denying them lifesaving health treatment and exiling them to countries they don't know so politicians can meet a target.
I dunno. But the first gets the outrage on this forum.
+1.
If Marc Wadsworth, a veteran anti-racist campaigner, is an anti-semite, how come his lawyer (Harriet Wistrich) is Jewish? There appears to be a witch hunt against people on the left, such as the distinguished film-maker Ken Loach, who campaign against injustice.
TM, in the use of the phrase "citizens of nowhere", revealed herself as a nasty person in her attitude to alien minorities.
The problem with Ken Loach (and those with similar views) is that their pursuit for justice for groups which they favour leads them to support injustice towards groups they dislike.
No. The problem is that they view this as a question of supporting this or that group rather than understanding this is about principles. If your principle is to be anti-racist then you are against racism directed at all groups, rather than simply singling out certain groups for support.
Edited extra bit: you're also neglecting that everyone I've seen here, from all sides, has condemned the Windrush scandal.
We're all opposed to anti-semitism. In my opinion the people who are using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage are the ones who need to look at themselves in the mirror.
Nam by those of your fellow party members. It may become legitimate in a couple of years time for you to complain that people keep harping on about Labour's former antisemitism problem, but there ain't nothing former about it at the moment. So suck it up, deal with it and stop whining.
Labour isn't my party. I've just spotted that this whole anti-semitism thing is being orchestrated by their enemies.
Are you really so thick that you don’t understand that this is what political enemies do?
The
"It would have been easy for Labour to deal with this in April 2016 with a proper report . They prevaricated. They screwed up. "
Yup. And they were punished by the country in June 2016!!
The definition of anti-Semitism itself has been expanded. Palestinians [ indeed all Arabs ] are now excluded even though they speak a semitic language.
The new definition is: criticism of Israel and its actions is anti-Semitic. Sadly, that's where we are. Palestinians get shot and nothing happens.........
"Anti-semitism" was the politically correct term for Jew Hatred, which came into vogue in the late 19th century. It never encompassed Arabs.
There were few Arabs in late nineteenth century Europe. When people like Dr. Karl Luger called themselves anti-semites, they weren't thinking about Arabs.
There was deep-seated anti-Muslim prejudice though.
Anti-Muslim prejudice was pretty virulent in the Balkans, among people who hated the Ottoman Empire. But, it was much less of an issue in places like Austria or France where politicians identified as anti-semites.
That wasn’t prejudice. That was hatred of colonisers/overlords.
It was both. Hatred was directed both at the overlords, and at ordinary Bosnians or Greeks who had converted to Islam (and naturally, hatred existed in the other direction).
Talking of giving offence I read this piece in the Telegraph yesterday by Frank Skinner
".........We’re living in the age of new Puritanism. To paraphrase Descartes: I’m offended, therefore I am.
At a show the other day, I decided to talk to an audience member in the front row who was in a wheelchair, I asked her, ‘So what sort of speed can you get?’ and some other woman shouted out, ‘You’re identifying her by her disability!’
I said, ‘that’s the reason why most comedians don’t talk to people in wheelchairs; in case someone like you yells at them’.
Then I turned to the woman in the wheelchair and said, ‘I won’t be speaking to you again, you’re trouble'. Then I addressed the audience saying, ‘I don’t know who to talk to next’ and this middle-aged woman pipes up, ‘I’m a lesbian, if that helps?’"
Meanwhile, more Palestinians get shot dead You can hear the condemnation ringing out NOT.
You are absolutely right about this last point.
Yarmouk has been under the full siege of the Syrian army since 2013, a situation causing a humanitarian crisis. According to some reports, the situation is so bad that residents have been forced to eat dogs & cats to survive.
In the past few weeks, at least 15 Palestinians have been killed in airstrikes and artillery shelling on Yarmouk. According to the London-based Action Group for Palestinians of Syria, 3,722 Palestinians (including 465 women) have been killed since the civil war started. Another 1,675 are said to have been detained by the Syrian authorities; another 309 are listed as missing.
More than 200 of the Palestinian victims died because of the lack of food and medical care.
On April 24, Syrian & Russian warplanes carried out more than 85 airstrikes on Yarmouk camp and dropped 24 barrels of explosives; 24 rocket and dozens of missiles were fired at the camp.
A day earlier, Syrian & Russian warplanes launched 220 airstrikes on Yarmouk. The warplanes dropped 55 barrels of dynamite on the camp, also targeted with 108 rockets & missiles.
According to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), the conflict in Syria "continues to disrupt the lives of civilians, resulting in death and injuries, internal displacement, extensive damage to civilian infrastructure and persistent humanitarian needs. Affected communities suffer indiscriminate violence, restrictions on their freedom of movement and continued violations of international humanitarian and human rights law. Palestinians are among those worst affected by the conflict."
No doubt Corbyn will be vocal in condemning these violent attacks on defenceless Palestinian women and children.
Or is it only Palestinians killed by Israelis he is bothered about?
Apart from the apparent desire to attack anyone and everyone, what possible reason could the Syrian Government and their Russian allies have for attacking a Palestinian refugee camp?
I think, Your Venerable cheerful Majesty, you answered your question before you even asked it.
(Or possibly they think Daesh fighters are hiding there.)
Unfair if she does. The tone had been set by May who clearly looks the nastier piece of work at the moment. Malevolence is always less attractive than mere incompetence.
I'm bemused by your witch-sniffer general capability of detecting nastiness in the Conservatives, but utterly missing it when it occurs in the Labour party. It's quite a skill...
One seems to be about party activists censuring representatives for attending particular meetings. The other is about throwing ordinary people out of their jobs, denying them lifesaving health treatment and exiling them to countries they don't know so politicians can meet a target.
I dunno. But the first gets the outrage on this forum.
+1.
If Marc Wadsworth, a veteran anti-racist campaigner, is an anti-semite, how come his lawyer (Harriet Wistrich) is Jewish? There appears to be a witch hunt against people on the left, such as the distinguished film-maker Ken Loach, who campaign against injustice.
TM, in the use of the phrase "citizens of nowhere", revealed herself as a nasty person in her attitude to alien minorities.
The problem with Ken Loach (and those with similar views) is that their pursuit for justice for groups which they favour leads them to support injustice towards groups they dislike.
While not a party to the evidence against Wadsworth, there doesn't seem to be anything in the public domain by him that is anti Semetic. If there is anything, then I would be interested to see it.
Loach is a different kettle of fish perhaps.
I don't think he was expelled for anti-semitism.
So what was he expelled for?
He accused Smeeth of sharing information with a Telegraph journalist.
Is that accusation grounds for expulsion?
I imagine that it is.
Even though Smeeth never contested the truth of the accusation?
Two points: it is usually the person making the accusation who needs to show the evidence justifying it. It is not for someone about whom an allegation is made to prove a negative.
I didn't realise till that tweet from Hodges that Ruth Smeeth used to work for BICOM. It is becoming more difficult by the day to split claims of antisemitism from the interests of the Israeli government which is really dangerous for Labour.
What is BICOM ? I need to look up Google.
They're responsible for Israeli propaganda in the UK.
Yarmouk, a Palestinian refugee camp near Damascus is facing a wide-scale military offensive & ethnic cleansing by the Syrian army & its allies.
On April 19, the Syrian army and its allies, including the Russians, launched a massive offensive against Yarmouk.
Since then, ...Yarmouk.
Yarmouk has been under the full siege of the Syrian army since 2013, a situation causing a humanitarian crisis. According to some reports, the situation is so bad that residents have been forced to eat dogs & cats to survive.
In the past few weeks, at least 15 Palestinians have been killed in airstrikes and artillery shelling on Yarmouk. According to the London-based Action Group for Palestinians of Syria, 3,722 Palestinians (including 465 women) have been killed since the civil war started. Another 1,675 are said to have been detained by the Syrian authorities; another 309 are listed as missing.
More than 200 of the Palestinian victims died because of the lack of food and medical care.
On April 24, Syrian & Russian warplanes carried out more than 85 airstrikes on Yarmouk camp and dropped 24 barrels of explosives; 24 rocket and dozens of missiles were fired at the camp.
A day earlier, Syrian & Russian warplanes launched 220 airstrikes on Yarmouk. The warplanes dropped 55 barrels of dynamite on the camp, also targeted with 108 rockets & missiles.
According to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), the conflict in Syria "continues to disrupt the lives of civilians, resulting in death and injuries, internal displacement, extensive damage to civilian infrastructure and persistent humanitarian needs. Affected communities suffer indiscriminate violence, restrictions on their freedom of movement and continued violations of international humanitarian and human rights law. Palestinians are among those worst affected by the conflict."
No doubt Corbyn will be vocal in condemning these violent attacks on defenceless Palestinian women and children.
Or is it only Palestinians killed by Israelis he is bothered about?
You are absolutely right in condemning the Syrians regarding ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
Sadly, I must have missed your condemnation of Israeli army shooting dead Palestinians teenagers.
You have indeed missed it as I have said this on numerous occasions, most recently a few days ago.
No doubt Corbyn will be vocal in condemning these violent attacks on defenceless Palestinian women and children.
Or is it only Palestinians killed by Israelis he is bothered about?
You are absolutely right in condemning the Syrians regarding ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
Sadly, I must have missed your condemnation of Israeli army shooting dead Palestinians teenagers.
You are also missing my point, sadly. Plenty of people in the Labour leadership condemn Israel for shooting Palestinian teenagers. But that same leadership is silent when those Palestinians it claims to care about are being shot by those it supports: Assad and the Russians. It is hard to discern what principle motivates the Labour leadership. It certainly isn't concern for Palestinian suffering.
Possibly, I dunno, it's who does the shooting which bothers them most.
Two points: it is usually the person making the accusation who needs to show the evidence justifying it. It is not for someone about whom an allegation is made to prove a negative.
Seriously, if that were used to define membership of political parties, there would be no one left.
The general point that there has been a campaign to destabilise Corbyn by some of the more Blairite MPs is correct, and -- unsurprisingly -- some of those MPs are in trouble. I’d single out Thangam Debonnaire as having brought most of her woes with her local party down on her by her own actions.
I am slightly cautious about getting involved in detail, as there may be more information that is not in the public domain.
But, at the moment, it seems to me that Wadsworth has been hard done by.
Edited extra bit: you're also neglecting that everyone I've seen here, from all sides, has condemned the Windrush scandal.
We're all opposed to anti-semitism. In my opinion the people who are using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage are the ones who need to look at themselves in the mirror.
No we aren't. I know I am. I don't know if you are, but I know that many people in your party aren't (and I know that because Corbyn has admitted it), so you might very well not be. I also know I am not using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage, because I was exactly as appalled by the antics of Aidan Burley as I am by those of your fellow party members. It may become legitimate in a couple of years time for you to complain that people keep harping on about Labour's former antisemitism problem, but there ain't nothing former about it at the moment. So suck it up, deal with it and stop whining.
Labour isn't my party. I've just spotted that this whole anti-semitism thing is being orchestrated by their enemies.
No, the evidence that it is real is overwhelming. There is Corbyn's admission, for starters. Yes, other factions in the Labour party and others outside it are treating it as a point-and-laugh opportunity, but so what? If you put antisemitism, and taking party political advantage of antisemitism, in the same moral ballpark, I'm very happy to put you down as an antisemite.
Your problem is that you wield the word 'antisemite' like a ball pein hammer while having only the slightest idea of what it means or what anyone affected might find offensive. In other words your posts on the subject are ignorant. Rare for you I'll admit
F1: putting together the pre-qualifying ramble. No tip (tempted by Raikkonen but 5.5 is too short). May be worth another tiny stakes look at Force India, who have been impressive in practice so far and have odds, to win, each way, of 326 for Perez and 401 for Ocon.
No doubt Corbyn will be vocal in condemning these violent attacks on defenceless Palestinian women and children.
Or is it only Palestinians killed by Israelis he is bothered about?
You are absolutely right in condemning the Syrians regarding ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
Sadly, I must have missed your condemnation of Israeli army shooting dead Palestinians teenagers.
You are also missing my point, sadly. Plenty of people in the Labour leadership condemn Israel for shooting Palestinian teenagers. But that same leadership is silent when those Palestinians it claims to care about are being shot by those it supports: Assad and the Russians. It is hard to discern what principle motivates the Labour leadership. It certainly isn't concern for Palestinian suffering.
Possibly, I dunno, it's who does the shooting which bothers them most.
Surely some mistake......
Also strange that seemingly the only country he is ready to apportion blame to fairly and squarely is Israel - everyone else it seems he needs more evidence for.
Two points: it is usually the person making the accusation who needs to show the evidence justifying it. It is not for someone about whom an allegation is made to prove a negative.
Seriously, if that were used to define membership of political parties, there would be no one left.
The general point that there has been a campaign to destabilise Corbyn by some of the more Blairite MPs is correct, and -- unsurprisingly -- some of those MPs are in trouble. I’d single out Thangam Debonnaire as having brought most of her woes with her local party down on her by her own actions.
I am slightly cautious about getting involved in detail, as there may be more information that is not in the public domain.
But, at the moment, it seems to me that Wadsworth has been hard done by.
I suggest you read my post upthread. Too many people commenting on this haven't the faintest idea what the rules of evidence or natural justice mean.
I didn't realise till that tweet from Hodges that Ruth Smeeth used to work for BICOM. It is becoming more difficult by the day to split claims of antisemitism from the interests of the Israeli government which is really dangerous for Labour.
What is BICOM ? I need to look up Google.
They're responsible for Israeli propaganda in the UK.
Do they post on here ?
I could not possibly comment!
Well Roger once accused me of being the Zionists arch defender on here - perhaps it's me
The slight flaw in Roger's rather strange little world view is when called out on it he couldn't produce any of these posts I had apparently made.
Hard to explain as he said I had made so many.
Amusingly also his comment to me followed a post which had nothing to do with Israel.
I assume he had been on a very nice lunch - being charitable.
No doubt Corbyn will be vocal in condemning these violent attacks on defenceless Palestinian women and children.
Or is it only Palestinians killed by Israelis he is bothered about?
You are absolutely right in condemning the Syrians regarding ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
Sadly, I must have missed your condemnation of Israeli army shooting dead Palestinians teenagers.
You are also missing my point, sadly. Plenty of people in the Labour leadership condemn Israel for shooting Palestinian teenagers. But that same leadership is silent when those Palestinians it claims to care about are being shot by those it supports: Assad and the Russians. It is hard to discern what principle motivates the Labour leadership. It certainly isn't concern for Palestinian suffering.
Possibly, I dunno, it's who does the shooting which bothers them most.
Surely some mistake......
Also strange that seemingly the only country he is ready to apportion blame to fairly and squarely is Israel - everyone else it seems he needs more evidence for.
Probably agree with you but Israel and especially it's soldiers don't help themselves,the Israeli sniper on the news the other day shooting a boy stood at the border fencing and his awful reaction of doing it just doesn't help Israel.
No doubt Corbyn will be vocal in condemning these violent attacks on defenceless Palestinian women and children.
Or is it only Palestinians killed by Israelis he is bothered about?
You are absolutely right in condemning the Syrians regarding ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
Sadly, I must have missed your condemnation of Israeli army shooting dead Palestinians teenagers.
You are also missing my point, sadly. Plenty of people in the Labour leadership condemn Israel for shooting Palestinian teenagers. But that same leadership is silent when those Palestinians it claims to care about are being shot by those it supports: Assad and the Russians. It is hard to discern what principle motivates the Labour leadership. It certainly isn't concern for Palestinian suffering.
Possibly, I dunno, it's who does the shooting which bothers them most.
I think people are entitled to expect different standards from a country that claims to be 'the Only Western democracy' in the Middle East. I'm sure those you refer to would be just as angry if it was Germany or France or Holland or any other 'Western Democracy' taking pot shots at unarmed protesters behind a wire and cheering at the results.
CBI not holding back anymore. Serious doubts on Fox:
"Britain's leading business group has "serious doubts" that the UK government will be able to fulfil its promise to roll-over Britain's 40 existing free trade deals with non-EU countries in time for Brexit, telling Business Insider that failure to do so could "wipe out" entire sectors of the economy.
UK International Trade Secretary Liam Fox has promised to roll-over Britain's existing deals with non-EU countries, as part of its EU membership, the "second after" Brexit.
However, the Confederation of British Industry has told BI that this is very unlikely to be possible, potentially leaving entire sectors of the economy on a "cliff-edge" after Brexit."
No doubt Corbyn will be vocal in condemning these violent attacks on defenceless Palestinian women and children.
Or is it only Palestinians killed by Israelis he is bothered about?
You are absolutely right in condemning the Syrians regarding ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
Sadly, I must have missed your condemnation of Israeli army shooting dead Palestinians teenagers.
You are also missing my point, sadly. Plenty of people in the Labour leadership condemn Israel for shooting Palestinian teenagers. But that same leadership is silent when those Palestinians it claims to care about are being shot by those it supports: Assad and the Russians. It is hard to discern what principle motivates the Labour leadership. It certainly isn't concern for Palestinian suffering.
Possibly, I dunno, it's who does the shooting which bothers them most.
Hard to defend Israeli actions, in any way, against the Palestinians unless you are completely biased.
No doubt Corbyn will be vocal in condemning these violent attacks on defenceless Palestinian women and children.
Or is it only Palestinians killed by Israelis he is bothered about?
You are absolutely right in condemning the Syrians regarding ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
Sadly, I must have missed your condemnation of Israeli army shooting dead Palestinians teenagers.
You are also missing my point, sadly. Plenty of people in the Labour leadership condemn Israel for shooting Palestinian teenagers. But that same leadership is silent when those Palestinians it claims to care about are being shot by those it supports: Assad and the Russians. It is hard to discern what principle motivates the Labour leadership. It certainly isn't concern for Palestinian suffering.
Possibly, I dunno, it's who does the shooting which bothers them most.
Hard to defend Israeli actions, in any way, against the Palestinians unless you are completely biased.
Very true , there are some on here totally unbalanced on the actions of the Israel State.
Far be it for me to interrupt opponents while they commit collective suicide, but whoever’s advising him needs to make a point of returning any donations with such clearly antisemitic messages attached - unless he’s happy for the first question in his appeal to be if he’s happy to take money from people who express such opinions.
In the spirit of continuing mischief, perhaps the Three Quidders could send, oh, £3?
My fellow PBers, with all of this talk of antisemitism and Windrush we are losing sight of what really matters. The local elections are under a week away. This is the season of dog muck and potholes.
Two points: it is usually the person making the accusation who needs to show the evidence justifying it. It is not for someone about whom an allegation is made to prove a negative.
Seriously, if that were used to define membership of political parties, there would be no one left.
The general point that there has been a campaign to destabilise Corbyn by some of the more Blairite MPs is correct, and -- unsurprisingly -- some of those MPs are in trouble. I’d single out Thangam Debonnaire as having brought most of her woes with her local party down on her by her own actions.
I am slightly cautious about getting involved in detail, as there may be more information that is not in the public domain.
But, at the moment, it seems to me that Wadsworth has been hard done by.
I suggest you read my post upthread. Too many people commenting on this haven't the faintest idea what the rules of evidence or natural justice mean.
The point about justice is that it is proportionate.
If the only evidence against Wadsworth is what is in the public domain, then expulsion is disproportionate.
No doubt Corbyn will be vocal in condemning these violent attacks on defenceless Palestinian women and children.
Or is it only Palestinians killed by Israelis he is bothered about?
You are absolutely right in condemning the Syrians regarding ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
Sadly, I must have missed your condemnation of Israeli army shooting dead Palestinians teenagers.
You are also missing my point, sadly. Plenty of people in the Labour leadership condemn Israel for shooting Palestinian teenagers. But that same leadership is silent when those Palestinians it claims to care about are being shot by those it supports: Assad and the Russians. It is hard to discern what principle motivates the Labour leadership. It certainly isn't concern for Palestinian suffering.
Possibly, I dunno, it's who does the shooting which bothers them most.
Surely some mistake......
Also strange that seemingly the only country he is ready to apportion blame to fairly and squarely is Israel - everyone else it seems he needs more evidence for.
Probably agree with you but Israel and especially it's soldiers don't help themselves,the Israeli sniper on the news the other day shooting a boy stood at the border fencing and his awful reaction of doing it just doesn't help Israel.
The wall the the Israelis have built round the West Bank and Gaza strip has led to a huge reduction in Palestinian suicide bomber attacks on Israeli public places like bus station. Much of the country's security strategy is based on preventing such attacks. Having seen the wall from both the West Bank and Israeli sides it isn't pretty but it has been effective. See this list of attacks here, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_suicide_attacks
Far be it for me to interrupt opponents while they commit collective suicide, but whoever’s advising him needs to make a point of returning any donations with such clearly antisemitic messages attached - unless he’s happy for the first question in his appeal to be if he’s happy to take money from people who express such opinions.
In the spirit of continuing mischief, perhaps the Three Quidders could send, oh, £3?
Send £3, with a message that’s it’s great for us blues for Labour to continue their civil war!
Who would have thought, five days before the local elections, that one major party would be screaming at each other about how racist they are? If they were instead spending their energies on fighting the government, they could have got the head of the Home Secretary last week.
My fellow PBers, with all of this talk of antisemitism and Windrush we are losing sight of what really matters. The local elections are under a week away. This is the season of dog muck and potholes.
In my opinion politicians of all parties shout "Resign" at their opponents rather too frequently these days and usually without good reason. There's a big difference between the false outrage of politicians and the genuine outrage of the public and if the public are not outraged (beyond party lines) then the false outrage of politicians carries little weight. It's not at all clear to me that Amber Rudd has crossed the line into outraging the general public... yet...
Rudd’s problem is her clear incompetence (I had thought she might be better than that) - but she seems unlikely now to pay the price for that, as doing so would expose May... and in any event clear incompetence is obviously no bar to cabinet office.
Hang on! What clear incompetence? Stop going with the herd you nerd. All this Amber bashing for being incompetent is clearly missing the point of the real cause of all her pain? Does Britain currently have an immigration policy or not? Is the policy working? Does that policy include targets for removing illegal immigrants or not? I think she is saying the right thing in wanting Home Office to focus on individual cases, rather than driven by targets. I think she is right, if that was Home Office approach for last 21 years we wouldn’t have a Windrush Scandal. if she is being bashed for incompetence failing to maintain pretence of a muddled policy, she inherited and asked to continue, that’s unfair. Unfair of you, who is doing that. Take a good look at yourselves, what policy are you actually defending with these attacks on the lady?
If the thicko cannot even read her mail she is totally incompetent. How the F*** can she do her job if she does not read the ministerial mail.
You are wrong if you think the ministers job is digest every email and paper in red box and then micro manage the whole department. You are partially right if you claim she should be able to rely on team to help her with that and they have let her down. The minister is there to implement the governments collective policy, steer behaviours and culture within the department to best achieve policy. The angry mob are not looking at this holistically, where Amber has not caused Windrush scandal, that anti individual target driven culture that came vogue with Blairism in 1997 has caused the windrush issues. Everything Amber Rudd has promised this week is antidote, not the poison.
Two points: it is usually the person making the accusation who needs to show the evidence justifying it. It is not for someone about whom an allegation is made to prove a negative.
Seriously, if that were used to define membership of political parties, there would be no one left.
The general point that there has been a campaign to destabilise Corbyn by some of the more Blairite MPs is correct, and -- unsurprisingly -- some of those MPs are in trouble. I’d single out Thangam Debonnaire as having brought most of her woes with her local party down on her by her own actions.
I am slightly cautious about getting involved in detail, as there may be more information that is not in the public domain.
But, at the moment, it seems to me that Wadsworth has been hard done by.
I suggest you read my post upthread. Too many people commenting on this haven't the faintest idea what the rules of evidence or natural justice mean.
The point about justice is that it is proportionate.
If the only evidence against Wadsworth is what is in the public domain, then expulsion is disproportionate.
The only issue that is likely to matter is whether the Labour Party has complied with its own disciplinary rules. A Court won't revisit the merits of the decision, unless the reasons given for it turn out to be a sham. It won't make any difference if Wadsworth can point to other people and say that they didn't get expelled for similar behaviour.
Some good news, I was able to log on at TSB and it worked well.
Does that mean you were able to close your account and transfer your money to another bank?
Because I have a funny feeling a lot of people will be doing that, even if hopefully it won't be Northern Rock or Overend and Gurney style.
A lot of people on twitter and down detector are threatening to .Be interesting to see the fall out.
I read recently that when RBS and Ulster Bank had similar problems they did not lose to many customers.
I only use my TSB current account as a savings account - move £500 in and out a month and earn 3 per cent interest on £1500. I expect their current account freebies are how they got so many customers.
I would not use them as my main account - their branches are antiquated and few if any have automated paying in machines etc. Queuing for a cashier is so 1970s.
TSB - the bank that likes to say yes! Those were the days.
CBI not holding back anymore. Serious doubts on Fox:
"Britain's leading business group has "serious doubts" that the UK government will be able to fulfil its promise to roll-over Britain's 40 existing free trade deals with non-EU countries in time for Brexit, telling Business Insider that failure to do so could "wipe out" entire sectors of the economy.
UK International Trade Secretary Liam Fox has promised to roll-over Britain's existing deals with non-EU countries, as part of its EU membership, the "second after" Brexit.
However, the Confederation of British Industry has told BI that this is very unlikely to be possible, potentially leaving entire sectors of the economy on a "cliff-edge" after Brexit."
No doubt Corbyn will be vocal in condemning these violent attacks on defenceless Palestinian women and children.
Or is it only Palestinians killed by Israelis he is bothered about?
You are absolutely right in condemning the Syrians regarding ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
Sadly, I must have missed your condemnation of Israeli army shooting dead Palestinians teenagers.
You are also missing my point, sadly. Plenty of people in the Labour leadership condemn Israel for shooting Palestinian teenagers. But that same leadership is silent when those Palestinians it claims to care about are being shot by those it supports: Assad and the Russians. It is hard to discern what principle motivates the Labour leadership. It certainly isn't concern for Palestinian suffering.
Possibly, I dunno, it's who does the shooting which bothers them most.
Hard to defend Israeli actions, in any way, against the Palestinians unless you are completely biased.
Yes, Cyclefree's dreadfully pompous and delusional musings are as bemusing as ever.
Palestinian refugees in Syria are fighting on both sides of the civil war and some on each sides are inevitably getting killed by the opposing forces.
They aren't getting killed because they are Palestinians, unlike the appalling things we've seen coming from the occupied territories.
Also condemning existing designated state enemies doesn't really achieve anything, whereas attacking our supposed close allies for egregious behaviour does have a function fo possibly changing policy.
Pretty simple stuff really, unless you have disappeared completely up your own fundament.
Two points: it is usually the person making the accusation who needs to show the evidence justifying it. It is not for someone about whom an allegation is made to prove a negative.
Seriously, if that were used to define membership of political parties, there would be no one left.
The general point that there has been a campaign to destabilise Corbyn by some of the more Blairite MPs is correct, and -- unsurprisingly -- some of those MPs are in trouble. I’d single out Thangam Debonnaire as having brought most of her woes with her local party down on her by her own actions.
I am slightly cautious about getting involved in detail, as there may be more information that is not in the public domain.
But, at the moment, it seems to me that Wadsworth has been hard done by.
I suggest you read my post upthread. Too many people commenting on this haven't the faintest idea what the rules of evidence or natural justice mean.
The point about justice is that it is proportionate.
If the only evidence against Wadsworth is what is in the public domain, then expulsion is disproportionate.
The only issue that is likely to matter is whether the Labour Party has complied with its own disciplinary rules. A Court won't revisit the merits of the decision, unless the reasons given for it turns out to be a sham. It won't make any difference if Wadsworth can point to other people and say that they didn't get expelled for similar behaviour.
In practise, the rules are made by the members, and if a significant portion of the membership are unhappy with arbitrary application of the rules, this will cause trouble.
Far be it for me to interrupt opponents while they commit collective suicide, but whoever’s advising him needs to make a point of returning any donations with such clearly antisemitic messages attached - unless he’s happy for the first question in his appeal to be if he’s happy to take money from people who express such opinions.
Nothing anti-semitic about criticising Israel. In fact by conflating Israel's actions with all jews you are expressing an anti-semitic view yourself.
Far be it for me to interrupt opponents while they commit collective suicide, but whoever’s advising him needs to make a point of returning any donations with such clearly antisemitic messages attached - unless he’s happy for the first question in his appeal to be if he’s happy to take money from people who express such opinions.
Nothing anti-semitic about criticising Israel. In fact by conflating Israel's actions with all jews you are expressing an anti-semitic view yourself.
Blimey there are a lot of ways to get accused of anti-semitism around here.
Some good news, I was able to log on at TSB and it worked well.
Does that mean you were able to close your account and transfer your money to another bank?
Because I have a funny feeling a lot of people will be doing that, even if hopefully it won't be Northern Rock or Overend and Gurney style.
A lot of people on twitter and down detector are threatening to .Be interesting to see the fall out.
I read recently that when RBS and Ulster Bank had similar problems they did not lose to many customers.
I only use my TSB current account as a savings account - move £500 in and out a month and earn 3 per cent interest on £1500. I expect their current account freebies are how they got so many customers.
I would not use them as my main account - their branches are antiquated and few if any have automated paying in machines etc. Queuing for a cashier is so 1970s.
TSB - the bank that likes to say yes! Those were the days.
Yes I am the same as you.Also use Santander for similar purposes.
Edited extra bit: you're also neglecting that everyone I've seen here, from all sides, has condemned the Windrush scandal.
We're all opposed to anti-semitism. In my opinion the people who are using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage are the ones who need to look at themselves in the mirror.
No we aren't. I know I am. I don't know if you are, but I know that many people in your party aren't (and I know that because Corbyn has admitted it), so you might very well not be. I also know I am not using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage, because I was exactly as appalled by the antics of Aidan Burley as I am by those of your fellow party members. It may become legitimate in a couple of years time for you to complain that people keep harping on about Labour's former antisemitism problem, but there ain't nothing former about it at the moment. So suck it up, deal with it and stop whining.
Labour isn't my party. I've just spotted that this whole anti-semitism thing is being orchestrated by their enemies.
No, the evidence that it is real is overwhelming. There is Corbyn's admission, for starters. Yes, other factions in the Labour party and others outside it are treating it as a point-and-laugh opportunity, but so what? If you put antisemitism, and taking party political advantage of antisemitism, in the same moral ballpark, I'm very happy to put you down as an antisemite.
Your problem is that you wield the word 'antisemite' like a ball pein hammer while having only the slightest idea of what it means or what anyone affected might find offensive. In other words your posts on the subject are ignorant. Rare for you I'll admit
You wield the expression "ball peen hammer" while having no idea how to spell it or what it is for (sharpening scythes, actually). I have a clear understanding of what antisemitism is, and can have a guess at how it felt to the 11 Jews who have been murdered in France for being Jews since 2006, to say nothing of events last cewntury.
CBI not holding back anymore. Serious doubts on Fox:
"Britain's leading business group has "serious doubts" that the UK government will be able to fulfil its promise to roll-over Britain's 40 existing free trade deals with non-EU countries in time for Brexit, telling Business Insider that failure to do so could "wipe out" entire sectors of the economy.
UK International Trade Secretary Liam Fox has promised to roll-over Britain's existing deals with non-EU countries, as part of its EU membership, the "second after" Brexit.
However, the Confederation of British Industry has told BI that this is very unlikely to be possible, potentially leaving entire sectors of the economy on a "cliff-edge" after Brexit."
Edited extra bit: you're also neglecting that everyone I've seen here, from all sides, has condemned the Windrush scandal.
We're all opposed to anti-semitism. In my opinion the people who are using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage are the ones who need to look at themselves in the mirror.
No we aren't. I know I am. I don't know if you are, but I know that many people in your party aren't (and I know that because Corbyn has admitted it), so you might very well not be. I also know I am not using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage, because I was exactly as appalled by the antics of Aidan Burley as I am by those of your fellow party members. It may become legitimate in a couple of years time for you to complain that people keep harping on about Labour's former antisemitism problem, but there ain't nothing former about it at the moment. So suck it up, deal with it and stop whining.
Labour isn't my party. I've just spotted that this whole anti-semitism thing is being orchestrated by their enemies.
No, the evidence that it is real is overwhelming. There is Corbyn's admission, for starters. Yes, other factions in the Labour party and others outside it are treating it as a point-and-laugh opportunity, but so what? If you put antisemitism, and taking party political advantage of antisemitism, in the same moral ballpark, I'm very happy to put you down as an antisemite.
Your problem is that you wield the word 'antisemite' like a ball pein hammer while having only the slightest idea of what it means or what anyone affected might find offensive. In other words your posts on the subject are ignorant. Rare for you I'll admit
You wield the expression "ball peen hammer" while having no idea how to spell it or what it is for (sharpening scythes, actually). I have a clear understanding of what antisemitism is, and can have a guess at how it felt to the 11 Jews who have been murdered in France for being Jews since 2006, to say nothing of events last cewntury.
Nothing anti-semitic about criticising Israel. In fact by conflating Israel's actions with all jews you are expressing an anti-semitic view yourself.
Blimey there are a lot of ways to get accused of anti-semitism around here.
Lol, yes. But there is a genuine point here. People who feel that anyone Jewish has a duty to support Israel regardless of their actions are falling into the same trap as people who assume that if you're Jewish then you are complicit in anything Israel does. Jewish people have exactly the same right to come to whatever conclusions they think fit about Israel or anywhere else: they can support it passionately, deny its right to exist, or anything in beween.
And yet it's difficult. Anyone with a passing knowledge of Jewish history must surely feel some sympathy for the idea that Jews needed a safe haven at last, and it's not unnatural for anyone who is Jewish to feel more personally addressed than by, say, the issues surrounding Sri Lanka's treatment of Tamils. Conversely, when the Israeli government oppresses Palestinians, it's natural for Jews to feel particular concern - hence Jewdas taking a strong view on this. But it's still dangerous, and simply wrong, to think lazily that anyone Jewish either should or does have a similar view on anything.
Far be it for me to interrupt opponents while they commit collective suicide, but whoever’s advising him needs to make a point of returning any donations with such clearly antisemitic messages attached - unless he’s happy for the first question in his appeal to be if he’s happy to take money from people who express such opinions.
Nothing anti-semitic about criticising Israel. In fact by conflating Israel's actions with all jews you are expressing an anti-semitic view yourself.
Blimey there are a lot of ways to get accused of anti-semitism around here.
Attributing the characteristics of one person to a whole race is racist.
Some good news, I was able to log on at TSB and it worked well.
Does that mean you were able to close your account and transfer your money to another bank?
Because I have a funny feeling a lot of people will be doing that, even if hopefully it won't be Northern Rock or Overend and Gurney style.
A lot of people on twitter and down detector are threatening to .Be interesting to see the fall out.
I read recently that when RBS and Ulster Bank had similar problems they did not lose to many customers.
I only use my TSB current account as a savings account - move £500 in and out a month and earn 3 per cent interest on £1500. I expect their current account freebies are how they got so many customers.
I would not use them as my main account - their branches are antiquated and few if any have automated paying in machines etc. Queuing for a cashier is so 1970s.
TSB - the bank that likes to say yes! Those were the days.
CBI not holding back anymore. Serious doubts on Fox:
"Britain's leading business group has "serious doubts" that the UK government will be able to fulfil its promise to roll-over Britain's 40 existing free trade deals with non-EU countries in time for Brexit, telling Business Insider that failure to do so could "wipe out" entire sectors of the economy.
UK International Trade Secretary Liam Fox has promised to roll-over Britain's existing deals with non-EU countries, as part of its EU membership, the "second after" Brexit.
However, the Confederation of British Industry has told BI that this is very unlikely to be possible, potentially leaving entire sectors of the economy on a "cliff-edge" after Brexit."
CBI not holding back anymore. Serious doubts on Fox:
"Britain's leading business group has "serious doubts" that the UK government will be able to fulfil its promise to roll-over Britain's 40 existing free trade deals with non-EU countries in time for Brexit, telling Business Insider that failure to do so could "wipe out" entire sectors of the economy.
UK International Trade Secretary Liam Fox has promised to roll-over Britain's existing deals with non-EU countries, as part of its EU membership, the "second after" Brexit.
However, the Confederation of British Industry has told BI that this is very unlikely to be possible, potentially leaving entire sectors of the economy on a "cliff-edge" after Brexit."
CBI not holding back anymore. Serious doubts on Fox:
"Britain's leading business group has "serious doubts" that the UK government will be able to fulfil its promise to roll-over Britain's 40 existing free trade deals with non-EU countries in time for Brexit, telling Business Insider that failure to do so could "wipe out" entire sectors of the economy.
UK International Trade Secretary Liam Fox has promised to roll-over Britain's existing deals with non-EU countries, as part of its EU membership, the "second after" Brexit.
However, the Confederation of British Industry has told BI that this is very unlikely to be possible, potentially leaving entire sectors of the economy on a "cliff-edge" after Brexit."
Unfair if she does. The tone had been set by May who clearly looks the nastier piece of work at the moment. Malevolence is always less attractive than mere incompetence.
I'm bemused by your witch-sniffer general capability of detecting nastiness in the Conservatives, but utterly missing it when it occurs in the Labour party. It's quite a skill...
One seems to be about party activists censuring representatives for attending particular meetings. The other is about throwing ordinary people out of their jobs, denying them lifesaving health treatment and exiling them to countries they don't know so politicians can meet a target.
I dunno. But the first gets the outrage on this forum.
+1.
If Marc Wadsworth, a veteran anti-racist campaigner, is an anti-semite, how come his lawyer (Harriet Wistrich) is Jewish? There appears to be a witch hunt against people on the left, such as the distinguished film-maker Ken Loach, who campaign against injustice.
TM, in the use of the phrase "citizens of nowhere", revealed herself as a nasty person in her attitude to alien minorities.
The problem with Ken Loach (and those with similar views) is that their pursuit for justice for groups which they favour leads them to support injustice towards groups they dislike.
While not a party to the evidence against Wadsworth, there doesn't seem to be anything in the public domain by him that is anti Semetic. If there is anything, then I would be interested to see it.
Loach is a different kettle of fish perhaps.
I don't think he was expelled for anti-semitism.
So what was he expelled for?
He accused Smeeth of sharing information with a Telegraph journalist.
Is that accusation grounds for expulsion?
I imagine that it is.
Even though Smeeth never contested the truth of the accusation?
Two points: it is usually the person making the accusation who needs to show the evidence justifying it. It is not for someone about whom an allegation is made to prove a negative.
No doubt Corbyn will be vocal in condemning these violent attacks on defenceless Palestinian women and children.
Or is it only Palestinians killed by Israelis he is bothered about?
You are absolutely right in condemning the Syrians regarding ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
Sadly, I must have missed your condemnation of Israeli army shooting dead Palestinians teenagers.
You are also missing my point, sadly. Plenty of people in the Labour leadership condemn Israel for shooting Palestinian teenagers. But that same leadership is silent when those Palestinians it claims to care about are being shot by those it supports: Assad and the Russians. It is hard to discern what principle motivates the Labour leadership. It certainly isn't concern for Palestinian suffering.
Possibly, I dunno, it's who does the shooting which bothers them most.
I think people are entitled to expect different standards from a country that claims to be 'the Only Western democracy' in the Middle East. I'm sure those you refer to would be just as angry if it was Germany or France or Holland or any other 'Western Democracy' taking pot shots at unarmed protesters behind a wire and cheering at the results.
I have no issue with expecting high standards of Israel.
I equally expect a party political leader who claims to be concerned with Palestinian suffering to speak up about it when that suffering is caused by an Arab leader and not just when it is caused by Israel. Corbyn finds it difficult, however, to do so.
It should be - the combined firm would be but a pimple on Amazon’s backside, and it’s not like margins in retail are particularly juicy.
I’d imagine the NFU would have something to say about it, especially so given the government are looking to reduce agricultural subsidy as we leave the EU.
No doubt Corbyn will be vocal in condemning these violent attacks on defenceless Palestinian women and children.
Or is it only Palestinians killed by Israelis he is bothered about?
You are absolutely right in condemning the Syrians regarding ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
Sadly, I must have missed your condemnation of Israeli army shooting dead Palestinians teenagers.
You are also missing my point, sadly. Plenty of people in the Labour leadership condemn Israel for shooting Palestinian teenagers. But that same leadership is silent when those Palestinians it claims to care about are being shot by those it supports: Assad and the Russians. It is hard to discern what principle motivates the Labour leadership. It certainly isn't concern for Palestinian suffering.
Possibly, I dunno, it's who does the shooting which bothers them most.
Surely some mistake......
Also strange that seemingly the only country he is ready to apportion blame to fairly and squarely is Israel - everyone else it seems he needs more evidence for.
Probably agree with you but Israel and especially it's soldiers don't help themselves,the Israeli sniper on the news the other day shooting a boy stood at the border fencing and his awful reaction of doing it just doesn't help Israel.
The wall the the Israelis have built round the West Bank and Gaza strip has led to a huge reduction in Palestinian suicide bomber attacks on Israeli public places like bus station. Much of the country's security strategy is based on preventing such attacks. Having seen the wall from both the West Bank and Israeli sides it isn't pretty but it has been effective. See this list of attacks here, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_suicide_attacks
Anybody know how Corbyn reacted to them?
If that list is correct then its been a effective policy.
Some good news, I was able to log on at TSB and it worked well.
Does that mean you were able to close your account and transfer your money to another bank?
Because I have a funny feeling a lot of people will be doing that, even if hopefully it won't be Northern Rock or Overend and Gurney style.
A lot of people on twitter and down detector are threatening to .Be interesting to see the fall out.
I read recently that when RBS and Ulster Bank had similar problems they did not lose to many customers.
I only use my TSB current account as a savings account - move £500 in and out a month and earn 3 per cent interest on £1500. I expect their current account freebies are how they got so many customers.
I would not use them as my main account - their branches are antiquated and few if any have automated paying in machines etc. Queuing for a cashier is so 1970s.
TSB - the bank that likes to say yes! Those were the days.
I thought you had to put in £500/month for a year. Can you take money out during this period ?
No doubt Corbyn will be vocal in condemning these violent attacks on defenceless Palestinian women and children.
Or is it only Palestinians killed by Israelis he is bothered about?
You are absolutely right in condemning the Syrians regarding ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
Sadly, I must have missed your condemnation of Israeli army shooting dead Palestinians teenagers.
You are also missing my point, sadly. Plenty of people in the Labour leadership condemn Israel for shooting Palestinian teenagers. But that same leadership is silent when those Palestinians it claims to care about are being shot by those it supports: Assad and the Russians. It is hard to discern what principle motivates the Labour leadership. It certainly isn't concern for Palestinian suffering.
Possibly, I dunno, it's who does the shooting which bothers them most.
Hard to defend Israeli actions, in any way, against the Palestinians unless you are completely biased.
Yes, Cyclefree's dreadfully pompous and delusional musings are as bemusing as ever.
Would you count 'self awareness' among your greatest skills?
Comments
Yup. And they were punished by the country in June 2016!!
The definition of anti-Semitism itself has been expanded. Palestinians [ indeed all Arabs ] are now excluded even though they speak a semitic language.
The new definition is: criticism of Israel and its actions is anti-Semitic. Sadly, that's where we are. Palestinians get shot and nothing happens.........
Stroll *might* have the pace but he can be a bit ropey. Got a potential qualifying bet in mind, but will wait to see odds.
Ladbrokes did have a special, 7.5 on both Ferraris to form the front row. Gone now, but those who backed it might be feeling reasonably confident.
PART 1
Well, there seems to be a lot of confusion and misinformation over the Wadsworth/Smeeth affair. As far as I can tell the position appears to be this:-
1. One of the recommendations of the Chakrabati Report (launched in June 2016) was that religious or racial tropes or stereotypes about groups of people should have no place in the modern Labour Party.
2. During the Q&A session following the launch, Wadsworth accused Ruth Smeeth of working “hand in hand” with the Telegraph about accusations of anti-semitism within Labour. This was part of a complaint he made about “media hostility” during which he accused Kate McCann, a Telegraph reporter of being a “troublemaker” and “racist” as part of the “witchhunt media”.
3. This upset her at the time and she made the following statement after the launch: “This morning, at the launch of the Chakrabarti Inquiry into antisemitism, I was verbally attacked by a Momentum activist and Jeremy Corbyn supporter who used traditional antisemitic slurs to attack me for being part of a 'media conspiracy'. It is beyond belief that someone could come to the launch of a report on antisemitism in the Labour Party and espouse such vile conspiracy theories about Jewish people, which were ironically highlighted as such in Ms Chakrabarti's report, while the leader of my own party stood by and did absolutely nothing.”
4. The Wadsworth accusation against Ms Smeeth might not have been a problem had there been evidence to back up his statements.
5. In the absence of such evidence, then it would appear to be a smear which might be understood to mean that a Jewish Labour MP was making up allegations of anti-semitism and/or using them as part of some campaign by a part of the press which did not support Labour in order to damage Labour. If that was the implication, then it was (and is) a pretty serious accusation to make against a Labour MP: to accuse her of deliberately setting out to damage her party.
6. Presumably Wadsworth was asked during his disciplinary hearing what evidence he had to support his statements about Ms Smeeth. We must assume from the outcome that no such evidence was provided. If so, then the hearing would have had to consider whether his unfounded allegation brought – or risked bringing – the Labour Party into disrepute. Clearly the panel hearing the evidence thought that it did. (If there was such evidence and it was credible and the panel ignored it, then they will be in trouble.)
7. The fact that Wadsworth is black and campaigned for the Lawrence family is irrelevant to whether he should be disciplined. The Daily Mail probably did more than Marc Wadsworth ever did to ensure a public inquiry and a change in the law to ensure that some of Stephen’s killers were brought to justice but that does not mean that they are – or should be – immune from criticism. The same applies to Wadsworth and any other anti-racism campaigner.
8. Similarly, the fact that Ms Smeeth was upset and is Jewish does not mean that she is exempt from criticism. If what Wadsworth had said about her was true then the fact that she is Jewish/was upset is irrelevant.
Presumably all those now contributing to Wadsworth’s appeal fund etc know and have the necessary evidence to show that he was justified in what he said. And will share it with the appeal panel.
Otherwise, it does look as if some are doing what the estimable Mr Meeks counselled against a few days ago: “Be especially sceptical of information that produces a strong emotional response from you. Ask yourself who wants to produce that response.”
Is a disgruntled Wadsworth -- perceived by neutrals to have been badly treated and launching legal action -- worse than a gruntled Wadsworth merely being rude to Ruth Smeeth?
Probably, it is.
The Labour Party should have picked on a very clear case -- like Nazi Shah MP -- and dealt with it. They seem to have compounded the original errors by picking on a dubious case (at least from what we know)..
Edit: I have just looked it up. I have no problem if a Jewish MP [ or any MP, for that matter ] support Israel. I would expect that. I would do it myself.
However, what I find unacceptable is they keep absolutely quiet when Palestinians [ who are under occupation for 51 years ] get shot and they keep absolutely stumm.
A Palestinian girl gets 8 months for slapping an Israeli soldier. Meanwhile an Israeli soldier gets 9 months for shooting dead a Palestinian teenager.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/25/world/middleeast/israel-border-shooting-sentencing.html
Semite
/ˈsiːmʌɪt,ˈsɛmʌɪt/
noun
plural noun: Semites
a member of any of the peoples who speak or spoke a Semitic language, including in particular the Jews and Arabs.
Do you sense a conspiracy?
Yarmouk, a Palestinian refugee camp near Damascus is facing a wide-scale military offensive & ethnic cleansing by the Syrian army & its allies.
Yarmouk camp was once home to some 160,000 Palestinians.
On April 19, the Syrian army and its allies, including the Russians, launched a massive offensive against Yarmouk.
Since then, 5,000 of the 6,000 residents left have fled, according to the United Nations & human rights organizations. Most of the camp's houses have been destroyed as a result of the fighting between the Syrian army and opposition groups that found shelter inside Yarmouk.
Yarmouk has been under the full siege of the Syrian army since 2013, a situation causing a humanitarian crisis. According to some reports, the situation is so bad that residents have been forced to eat dogs & cats to survive.
In the past few weeks, at least 15 Palestinians have been killed in airstrikes and artillery shelling on Yarmouk. According to the London-based Action Group for Palestinians of Syria, 3,722 Palestinians (including 465 women) have been killed since the civil war started. Another 1,675 are said to have been detained by the Syrian authorities; another 309 are listed as missing.
More than 200 of the Palestinian victims died because of the lack of food and medical care.
On April 24, Syrian & Russian warplanes carried out more than 85 airstrikes on Yarmouk camp and dropped 24 barrels of explosives; 24 rocket and dozens of missiles were fired at the camp.
A day earlier, Syrian & Russian warplanes launched 220 airstrikes on Yarmouk. The warplanes dropped 55 barrels of dynamite on the camp, also targeted with 108 rockets & missiles.
According to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), the conflict in Syria "continues to disrupt the lives of civilians, resulting in death and injuries, internal displacement, extensive damage to civilian infrastructure and persistent humanitarian needs. Affected communities suffer indiscriminate violence, restrictions on their freedom of movement and continued violations of international humanitarian and human rights law. Palestinians are among those worst affected by the conflict."
No doubt Corbyn will be vocal in condemning these violent attacks on defenceless Palestinian women and children.
Or is it only Palestinians killed by Israelis he is bothered about?
Sadly, I must have missed your condemnation of Israeli army shooting dead Palestinians teenagers.
(Or possibly they think Daesh fighters are hiding there.)
Because I have a funny feeling a lot of people will be doing that, even if hopefully it won't be Northern Rock or Overend and Gurney style.
I read recently that when RBS and Ulster Bank had similar problems they did not lose to many customers.
Possibly, I dunno, it's who does the shooting which bothers them most.
The general point that there has been a campaign to destabilise Corbyn by some of the more Blairite MPs is correct, and -- unsurprisingly -- some of those MPs are in trouble. I’d single out Thangam Debonnaire as having brought most of her woes with her local party down on her by her own actions.
I am slightly cautious about getting involved in detail, as there may be more information that is not in the public domain.
But, at the moment, it seems to me that Wadsworth has been hard done by.
Also strange that seemingly the only country he is ready to apportion blame to fairly and squarely is Israel - everyone else it seems he needs more evidence for.
The slight flaw in Roger's rather strange little world view is when called out on it he couldn't produce any of these posts I had apparently made.
Hard to explain as he said I had made so many.
Amusingly also his comment to me followed a post which had nothing to do with Israel.
I assume he had been on a very nice lunch - being charitable.
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2018/04/azerbaijan-pre-qualifying-2018.html
A manifesto upfront about being full of shit.....
If the only evidence against Wadsworth is what is in the public domain, then expulsion is disproportionate.
Asda and Sainsbury in 10 billion merger talks
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_suicide_attacks
Anybody know how Corbyn reacted to them?
Who would have thought, five days before the local elections, that one major party would be screaming at each other about how racist they are? If they were instead spending their energies on fighting the government, they could have got the head of the Home Secretary last week.
I would not use them as my main account - their branches are antiquated and few if any have automated paying in machines etc. Queuing for a cashier is so 1970s.
TSB - the bank that likes to say yes! Those were the days.
Palestinian refugees in Syria are fighting on both sides of the civil war and some on each sides are inevitably getting killed by the opposing forces.
They aren't getting killed because they are Palestinians, unlike the appalling things we've seen coming from the occupied territories.
Also condemning existing designated state enemies doesn't really achieve anything, whereas attacking our supposed close allies for egregious behaviour does have a function fo possibly changing policy.
Pretty simple stuff really, unless you have disappeared completely up your own fundament.
You’re mad - all of you.
https://www.stanleytools.com/products/hand-tools/hammers/ball-pein
And yet it's difficult. Anyone with a passing knowledge of Jewish history must surely feel some sympathy for the idea that Jews needed a safe haven at last, and it's not unnatural for anyone who is Jewish to feel more personally addressed than by, say, the issues surrounding Sri Lanka's treatment of Tamils. Conversely, when the Israeli government oppresses Palestinians, it's natural for Jews to feel particular concern - hence Jewdas taking a strong view on this. But it's still dangerous, and simply wrong, to think lazily that anyone Jewish either should or does have a similar view on anything.
TSB - Yes.
Who is this I. Effect of whom you speak?
But Liam Fox seems to be one person who unites PBers of all persuasions.
It is not normally possible to prove a negative.
EG
Prove that you did not poison the Skripals.
I equally expect a party political leader who claims to be concerned with Palestinian suffering to speak up about it when that suffering is caused by an Arab leader and not just when it is caused by Israel. Corbyn finds it difficult, however, to do so.
One can only speculate as to why that might be.