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 ?
I think those type of high interest current accounts stipulate a regular payment of at least £500 per month plus at least three direct debits.
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.
The DDR said much the same. About emigration, though.
Both are already far too big. We need more competition not less.
If they're really struggling they would be better off concentrating on core grocery business than trying to pile up tat and undercut Amazon selling it cheap.
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.
It was said that the Saudi Arabian policy of cutting arms off for those convicted of theft cut offending almost completely. Not because of its deterrent effect but because most thieves are recidivists and without arms it's difficult to steal. The ends don't always justify the means
@rottenborough Why do you think the Tories are going to get slaughtered in 2022? I think Alastair Meeks’ makes some good points in terms of the effect of Windrush scandal re BAME and young voters, but even then I’d be shocked to see the party slaughtered. I think they’ll carry at least 40% of the electorate and the next GE might be a knife edge one.
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?
Mike, every country has the right to build a wall in their own country - pretty or not. Even the USA has the right to build a wall. I have no doubt Israel feels more secure.
The question is this: does Israel have a right to build a wall or houses in occupied territory ? That is called annexation. One never seems to get an answer to that question.
@rottenborough Why do you think the Tories are going to get slaughtered in 2022? I think Alastair Meeks’ makes some good points in terms of the effect of Windrush scandal re BAME and young voters, but even then I’d be shocked to see the party slaughtered. I think they’ll carry at least 40% of the electorate and the next GE might be a knife edge one.
We must not forget that many people privately may even support the policies that led to Windrush or similar situations. They may not be so outspoken. Those people put off by this probably does not vote Tory anyway.
It could be allowed as with newish entrants Aldi and Lidl having substantive market shares there is more competition nowadays.
Between them Tesco and the new group would have 60% of the grocery market.
Sainsbury/ASDA would be stronger competition to TESCO than Sainsbury and ASDA separately.
Why's that then?
Economies of scale - such as using their combined buying power to negotiate lower prices with suppliers and in turn lower their prices to customers and be more competitive.
Also you only need one CEO, one HR department, one property head, etc.
@rottenborough Why do you think the Tories are going to get slaughtered in 2022? I think Alastair Meeks’ makes some good points in terms of the effect of Windrush scandal re BAME and young voters, but even then I’d be shocked to see the party slaughtered. I think they’ll carry at least 40% of the electorate and the next GE might be a knife edge one.
We must not forget that many people privately may even support the policies that led to Windrush or similar situations. They may not be so outspoken. Those people put off by this probably does not vote Tory anyway.
Privately? Many openly supported the hostile environment policy in the YouGov poll yesterday. I think it’s right that those put off aren’t likely to be Tory voters although Meeks’ point was that the Tories do need to make an inroad into groups such as younger voters and BAME voters in the future. Still, I think their support from older voters at this moment in time will be enough to get them to at least 40% - there are still more of them than younger voters.
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.
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 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.
It was said that the Saudi Arabian policy of cutting arms off for those convicted of theft cut offending almost completely. Not because of its deterrent effect but because most thieves are recidivists and without arms it's difficult to steal. The ends don't always justify the means
Self- defence is a basic right and duty for all nations. Even Israel. You really need to get over it.
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.
The people funding the Mugabe-loving Jew-hating loony's legal action, or at least those cited, weren't "criticising Israel", though, were they? They were recycling well-known antisemitic tropes about Jewish (ahem Israeli nudge nudge wink wink) control of politics in other countries, and about Jews in those countries being disloyal to their nations in favour of the interests of Israel.
It's the difference between "David Cameron was a poor prime minister with a limited grasp of economics, social policy, and international relations", and "David Cameron laughed at the disabled and stole food from children while putting his winkie in a dead pig".
As for substantive criticism of Israel, the widely accepted IHRA definition is good and right. Criticising Israeli government actions is entirely legitimate. Damning the Jews as unentitled to a homeland is not (unless you don't believe in nation states at all), and criticising Israel for stuff you'd think was fine if another country did it is a strong indicator that you are probably an antisemite.
If your response to an English Jew in England being abused by a Black British antisemite during an event held in the UK by a British political party to discuss a report by a British Bengali lawyer into antisemitism in Britain is "yes but Palestine", you're probably an antisemite.
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 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?
Mike, every country has the right to build a wall in their own country - pretty or not. Even the USA has the right to build a wall. I have no doubt Israel feels more secure.
The question is this: does Israel have a right to build a wall or houses in occupied territory ? That is called annexation. One never seems to get an answer to that question.
The wall exists, it works. The 2 state solution needed is a separate matter and requires an international effort which 50+ years on since 67 is still not there. There is fault on both sides.
@rottenborough Why do you think the Tories are going to get slaughtered in 2022? I think Alastair Meeks’ makes some good points in terms of the effect of Windrush scandal re BAME and young voters, but even then I’d be shocked to see the party slaughtered. I think they’ll carry at least 40% of the electorate and the next GE might be a knife edge one.
We must not forget that many people privately may even support the policies that led to Windrush or similar situations. They may not be so outspoken. Those people put off by this probably does not vote Tory anyway.
Privately? Many openly supported the hostile environment policy in the YouGov poll yesterday. I think it’s right that those put off aren’t likely to be Tory voters although Meeks’ point was that the Tories do need to make an inroad into groups such as younger voters and BAME voters in the future. Still, I think their support from older voters at this moment in time will be enough to get them to at least 40% - there are still more of them than younger voters.
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.
The people funding the Mugabe-loving Jew-hating loony's legal action, or at least those cited, weren't "criticising Israel", though, were they? They were recycling well-known antisemitic tropes about Jewish (ahem Israeli nudge nudge wink wink) control of politics in other countries, and about Jews in those countries being disloyal to their nations in favour of the interests of Israel.
It's the difference between "David Cameron was a poor prime minister with a limited grasp of economics, social policy, and international relations", and "David Cameron laughed at the disabled and stole food from children while putting his winkie in a dead pig".
As for substantive criticism of Israel, the widely accepted IHRA definition is good and right. Criticising Israeli government actions is entirely legitimate. Damning the Jews as unentitled to a homeland is not (unless you don't believe in nation states at all), and criticising Israel for stuff you'd think was fine if another country did it is a strong indicator that you are probably an antisemite.
If your response to an English Jew in England being abused by a Black British antisemite during an event held in the UK by a British political party to discuss a report by a British Bengali lawyer into antisemitism in Britain is "yes but Palestine", you're probably an antisemite.
Damning the Jews for being entitled to a homeland....... hmmm. Of course not. Criticising the Jews for taking, with, at the time Great Power support, someone elses homeland, and making the folk already there second class citizens..........not an easy one!
Then again, the phrase ‘British Bengali lawyer’ could be said to have less than pleasant undertones.
Suppose the Roma decided they wanted a ‘homeland’. What would decent, charitable people think and do?
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.
evidence for this utter bollocks?
Just open your eyes.
Translation = none
Translation = Just because you lack critical thinking skills doesn't require me to teach them to you.
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.
r.
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.
It was said that the Saudi Arabian policy of cutting arms off for those convicted of theft cut offending almost completely. Not because of its deterrent effect but because most thieves are recidivists and without arms it's difficult to steal. The ends don't always justify the means
Can I just point out that although most thieves probably are recidivists, most Recidivists aren't thieves.
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.
evidence for this utter bollocks?
Just open your eyes.
Translation = none
Translation = Just because you lack critical thinking skills doesn't require me to teach them to you.
Was amazed when Macron criticised Trump for an isolationist foreign policy. He has John Bolton in his war room and has only just finished chucking a load of missiles in Syria's direction !
Nothing anti-semitic about criticising Israel. In fact by conflating Israel's actions with all jews you are expressing an anti-semitic view yourself.
If your response to an English Jew in England being abused by a Black British antisemite during an event held in the UK by a British political party to discuss a report by a British Bengali lawyer into antisemitism in Britain is "yes but Palestine", you're probably an antisemite.
Damning the Jews for being entitled to a homeland....... hmmm. Of course not. Criticising the Jews for taking, with, at the time Great Power support, someone elses homeland, and making the folk already there second class citizens..........not an easy one!
Then again, the phrase ‘British Bengali lawyer’ could be said to have less than pleasant undertones.
Suppose the Roma decided they wanted a ‘homeland’. What would decent, charitable people think and do?
I really don't see how describing someone's nationality, cultural heritage, and profession, has any undertones at all in this scenario.
Your history of modern Israel is a fantasy. Arab Israelis are full citizens, the land was not someone else's at the time Israel was created, it was effectively part of the British empire, the UN resolution was supported by a huge range of countries, not just "great powers", and Jews have lived there continuously for thousands of years, albeit yes their number did grow significantly in the 1940s, there were reasons for that. Thereafter, the number of Arabs displaced from Israel by, mostly, wars started by Arab nations, was smaller than the number of Jewish refugees Israel took in from other Arab nations.
It's a standard tactic. "I don't mind Jews, they just shouldn't be here", where "here" is whrrever Jews happen to be at any given moment.
The Romani people overwhelmingly and explicitly identify as a non-territorial people so despite abortive Soviet attempts to put them in an autonomous oblast that, even by the standards of whataboutery, is a poor hypothetical effort.
Nothing anti-semitic about criticising Israel. In fact by conflating Israel's actions with all jews you are expressing an anti-semitic view yourself.
If your response to an English Jew in England being abused by a Black British antisemite during an event held in the UK by a British political party to discuss a report by a British Bengali lawyer into antisemitism in Britain is "yes but Palestine", you're probably an antisemite.
Damning the Jews for being entitled to a homeland....... hmmm. Of course not. Criticising the Jews for taking, with, at the time Great Power support, someone elses homeland, and making the folk already there second class citizens..........not an easy one!
Then again, the phrase ‘British Bengali lawyer’ could be said to have less than pleasant undertones.
Suppose the Roma decided they wanted a ‘homeland’. What would decent, charitable people think and do?
I really don't see how describing someone's nationality, cultural heritage, and profession, has any undertones at all in this scenario.
Your history of modern Israel is a fantasy. Arab Israelis are full citizens, the land was not someone else's at the time Israel was created, it was effectively part of the British empire, the UN resolution was supported by a huge range of countries, not just "great powers", and Jews have lived there continuously for thousands of years, albeit yes their number did grow significantly in the 1940s, there were reasons for that. Thereafter, the number of Arabs displaced from Israel by, mostly, wars started by Arab nations, was smaller than the number of Jewish refugees Israel took in from other Arab nations.
It's a standard tactic. "I don't mind Jews, they just shouldn't be here", where "here" is whrrever Jews happen to be at any given moment.
The Romani people overwhelmingly and explicitly identify as a non-territorial people so despite abortive Soviet attempts to put them in an autonomous oblast that, even by the standards of whataboutery, is a poor hypothetical effort.
And the bits that Israel now occupy post 1967/8 are because they fought back a coordinated Arab invasion by surrounding counties that wanted Israel for themselves. Unfortunately they got a massive beating and Israel continued on and chased troops back to the river Jordon.
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 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?
Mike, every country has the right to build a wall in their own country - pretty or not. Even the USA has the right to build a wall. I have no doubt Israel feels more secure.
The question is this: does Israel have a right to build a wall or houses in occupied territory ? That is called annexation. One never seems to get an answer to that question.
The wall exists, it works. The 2 state solution needed is a separate matter and requires an international effort which 50+ years on since 67 is still not there. There is fault on both sides.
@Felix: Normally you would be full of rightful moral indignation. But when it comes to the State of Israel building a wall and houses on other people's land and orchards, the best you can say is "Get over it".
Nothing anti-semitic about criticising Israel. In fact by conflating Israel's actions with all jews you are expressing an anti-semitic view yourself.
If your response to an English Jew in England being abused by a Black British antisemite during an event held in the UK by a British political party to discuss a report by a British Bengali lawyer into antisemitism in Britain is "yes but Palestine", you're probably an antisemite.
Damning the Jews for being entitled to a homeland....... hmmm. Of course not. Criticising the Jews for taking, with, at the time Great Power support, someone elses homeland, and making the folk already there second class citizens..........not an easy one!
Then again, the phrase ‘British Bengali lawyer’ could be said to have less than pleasant undertones.
Suppose the Roma decided they wanted a ‘homeland’. What would decent, charitable people think and do?
I really don't see how describing someone's nationality, cultural heritage, and profession, has any undertones at all in this scenario.
Your history of modern Israel is a fantasy. Arab Israelis are full citizens, the land was not someone else's at the time Israel was created, it was effectively part of the British empire, the UN resolution was supported by a huge range of countries, not just "great powers", and Jews have lived there continuously for thousands of years, albeit yes their number did grow significantly in the 1940s, there were reasons for that. Thereafter, the number of Arabs displaced from Israel by, mostly, wars started by Arab nations, was smaller than the number of Jewish refugees Israel took in from other Arab nations.
It's a standard tactic. "I don't mind Jews, they just shouldn't be here", where "here" is whrrever Jews happen to be at any given moment.
The Romani people overwhelmingly and explicitly identify as a non-territorial people so despite abortive Soviet attempts to put them in an autonomous oblast that, even by the standards of whataboutery, is a poor hypothetical effort.
And the bits that Israel now occupy post 1967/8 are because they fought back a coordinated Arab invasion by surrounding counties that wanted Israel for themselves. Unfortunately they got a massive beating and Israel continued on and chased troops back to the river Jordon.
So you do not agree with the official British and UN position on this ?
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.
N.
Labour isn't my party. I've just spotted that this whole anti-semitism thing is being orchestrated by their enemies.
evidence for this utter bollocks?
Just open your eyes.
Translation = none
Translation = Just because you lack critical thinking skills doesn't require me to teach them to you.
you made the claim - back it up
You know you can't
I wouldn't have been able to disprove the Zinoviev letter the day it was published either.
But it is the people who are claiming that the Labour Party has a problem with anti-semitism who should provide the proof of what, if true, would be a very serious accusation. But it is all inuendo and insinuation.
Here are my reasons for skepticism.
- there is a long history of the media making stuff up about the left. The Zinoviev letter is just one example. - it is mainly being discussed by people who have a partisan position and who are not reliable witnesses - it was brought up just before the local elections. - it is poorly defined. What exactly is the problem supposed to be? What is supposed to be done about it? - it completely contradicts my personal experience of anti-semitism which I have never encountered from anyone I know to be left wing whereas I have from people who are right wing. - not least, just how quickly I have been accused of being anti-semitic on this very forum when I don't go along with the Corbyn bashing. It is clearly something that many have a very low bar set for.
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.
The people funding the Mugabe-loving Jew-hating loony's legal action, or at least those cited, weren't "criticising Israel", though, were they? They were recycling well-known antisemitic tropes about Jewish (ahem Israeli nudge nudge wink wink) control of politics in other countries, and about Jews in those countries being disloyal to their nations in favour of the interests of Israel.
It's the difference between "David Cameron was a poor prime minister with a limited grasp of economics, social policy, and international relations", and "David Cameron laughed at the disabled and stole food from children while putting his winkie in a dead pig".
As for substantive criticism of Israel, the widely accepted IHRA definition is good and right. Criticising Israeli government actions is entirely legitimate. Damning the Jews as unentitled to a homeland is not (unless you don't believe in nation states at all), and criticising Israel for stuff you'd think was fine if another country did it is a strong indicator that you are probably an antisemite.
If your response to an English Jew in England being abused by a Black British antisemite during an event held in the UK by a British political party to discuss a report by a British Bengali lawyer into antisemitism in Britain is "yes but Palestine", you're probably an antisemite.
I wouldn't have been able to disprove the Zinoviev letter the day it was published either.
But it is the people who are claiming that the Labour Party has a problem with anti-semitism who should provide the proof of what, if true, would be a very serious accusation. But it is all inuendo and insinuation.
Here are my reasons for skepticism.
- there is a long history of the media making stuff up about the left. The Zinoviev letter is just one example. - it is mainly being discussed by people who have a partisan position and who are not reliable witnesses - it was brought up just before the local elections. - it is poorly defined. What exactly is the problem supposed to be? What is supposed to be done about it? - it completely contradicts my personal experience of anti-semitism which I have never encountered from anyone I know to be left wing whereas I have from people who are right wing. - not least, just how quickly I have been accused of being anti-semitic on this very forum when I don't go along with the Corbyn bashing. It is clearly something that many have a very low bar set for.
"Jeremy Corbyn has apologised for antisemitism in the Labour Party ahead of a crunch meeting with Jewish community leaders.
The Labour leader said his party had “not done enough” to tackle the issue and admitted the Labour’s methods of dealing with anti-Jewish abuse were “not fully fit for purpose”.
Jewish people “deserve an apology”, he said, adding that he was “sorry for the hurt and distressed caused”.
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.
The people funding the Mugabe-loving Jew-hating loony's legal action, or at least those cited, weren't "criticising Israel", though, were they? They were recycling well-known antisemitic tropes about Jewish (ahem Israeli nudge nudge wink wink) control of politics in other countries, and about Jews in those countries being disloyal to their nations in favour of the interests of Israel.
It's the difference between "David Cameron was a poor prime minister with a limited grasp of economics, social policy, and international relations", and "David Cameron laughed at the disabled and stole food from children while putting his winkie in a dead pig".
As for substantive criticism of Israel, the widely accepted IHRA definition is good and right. Criticising Israeli government actions is entirely legitimate. Damning the Jews as unentitled to a homeland is not (unless you don't believe in nation states at all), and criticising Israel for stuff you'd think was fine if another country did it is a strong indicator that you are probably an antisemite.
If your response to an English Jew in England being abused by a Black British antisemite during an event held in the UK by a British political party to discuss a report by a British Bengali lawyer into antisemitism in Britain is "yes but Palestine", you're probably an antisemite.
What an ugly post
The truth is often ugly, particularly when it tells you something you'd prefer to deny.
That you think this post is a problem, but not the sewer of antisemitism on Mad Marc's fundraising appeal, says something, and it's not something good.
Comments
TESCO 27.9%
Turns out you can't play your Wildcard and Bench boost on the same week.
#FFFup.
https://qz.com/#1221402/amazon-amzn-is-planning-to-launch-a-grocery-delivery-service-in-france/
If they're really struggling they would be better off concentrating on core grocery business than trying to pile up tat and undercut Amazon selling it cheap.
Maybe we can wish for a bit of optimism for these unfortunate people.
The question is this: does Israel have a right to build a wall or houses in occupied territory ? That is called annexation. One never seems to get an answer to that question.
Also you only need one CEO, one HR department, one property head, etc.
There is intense rivalry and competition in the Cola market with just two major competitors. Less can be more.
It's the difference between "David Cameron was a poor prime minister with a limited grasp of economics, social policy, and international relations", and "David Cameron laughed at the disabled and stole food from children while putting his winkie in a dead pig".
As for substantive criticism of Israel, the widely accepted IHRA definition is good and right. Criticising Israeli government actions is entirely legitimate. Damning the Jews as unentitled to a homeland is not (unless you don't believe in nation states at all), and criticising Israel for stuff you'd think was fine if another country did it is a strong indicator that you are probably an antisemite.
If your response to an English Jew in England being abused by a Black British antisemite during an event held in the UK by a British political party to discuss a report by a British Bengali lawyer into antisemitism in Britain is "yes but Palestine", you're probably an antisemite.
Criticising the Jews for taking, with, at the time Great Power support, someone elses homeland, and making the folk already there second class citizens..........not an easy one!
Then again, the phrase ‘British Bengali lawyer’ could be said to have less than pleasant undertones.
Suppose the Roma decided they wanted a ‘homeland’. What would decent, charitable people think and do?
You know you can't
Your history of modern Israel is a fantasy. Arab Israelis are full citizens, the land was not someone else's at the time Israel was created, it was effectively part of the British empire, the UN resolution was supported by a huge range of countries, not just "great powers", and Jews have lived there continuously for thousands of years, albeit yes their number did grow significantly in the 1940s, there were reasons for that. Thereafter, the number of Arabs displaced from Israel by, mostly, wars started by Arab nations, was smaller than the number of Jewish refugees Israel took in from other Arab nations.
It's a standard tactic. "I don't mind Jews, they just shouldn't be here", where "here" is whrrever Jews happen to be at any given moment.
The Romani people overwhelmingly and explicitly identify as a non-territorial people so despite abortive Soviet attempts to put them in an autonomous oblast that, even by the standards of whataboutery, is a poor hypothetical effort.
But it is the people who are claiming that the Labour Party has a problem with anti-semitism who should provide the proof of what, if true, would be a very serious accusation. But it is all inuendo and insinuation.
Here are my reasons for skepticism.
- there is a long history of the media making stuff up about the left. The Zinoviev letter is just one example.
- it is mainly being discussed by people who have a partisan position and who are not reliable witnesses
- it was brought up just before the local elections.
- it is poorly defined. What exactly is the problem supposed to be? What is supposed to be done about it?
- it completely contradicts my personal experience of anti-semitism which I have never encountered from anyone I know to be left wing whereas I have from people who are right wing.
- not least, just how quickly I have been accused of being anti-semitic on this very forum when I don't go along with the Corbyn bashing. It is clearly something that many have a very low bar set for.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-labour-antisemitism-jewish-leaders-israel-racism-a8320041.html
"Jeremy Corbyn has apologised for antisemitism in the Labour Party ahead of a crunch meeting with Jewish community leaders.
The Labour leader said his party had “not done enough” to tackle the issue and admitted the Labour’s methods of dealing with anti-Jewish abuse were “not fully fit for purpose”.
Jewish people “deserve an apology”, he said, adding that he was “sorry for the hurt and distressed caused”.
Whom to believe, Jeremy or you?
That you think this post is a problem, but not the sewer of antisemitism on Mad Marc's fundraising appeal, says something, and it's not something good.