Seeing as the whole Finklestein thesis depends on a detailed textural analysis it's worth looking at the text. The bar for racism has never been lower since Bannon Trump Boris and the Brexiteers Robinson Netanyahu etc etc so this should be judged against that backdrop...
“The other evening we had a meeting in parliament in which Manuel [the Palestinian ambassador] made an incredibly powerful and passionate and effective speech about the history of Palestine and the rights of the Palestinian people. This was dutifully recorded by the – the thankfully silent Zionists who were in the audience on that occasion, and then came up and berated him afterwards for what he had said. They clearly have two problems: one is they don’t want to study history and secondly having lived in this country for a very long time, probably all their lives, they don’t understand English irony either. They needed two lessons, which we could perhaps help them with.”
But apparently Manuel Hassassian *is* a master of English irony, despite never living here at all? And as for that last sentence - I have rarely read anything nastier.
It seems to me that he/they had problems with some in the audience who gave the Palestinian speakers a hard time which explains the 'they' and 'them'. In other words he was not generically referring to Jews but to the objectors. The last line as you say is sinister and a little chilling
Think about it like this: if you accused a specific Muslim of not understanding the British despite having lived here all their life then then you have said that they aren’t really British. That is textbook racism.
Bit tricky to keep it confidential when you go to a public court. They certainly did keep it confidential until the investigation was completed. Is Salmond claiming that no one should ever know? I think that is a bit optimistic and frankly disrespectful to his alleged victims too.
Big trouble for SNP nevertheless. They will be dragged through the courts. No opening for you to make a bundle out of it David, give Alex a ring.
And yet you are so content to frequently, misleadingly, hypocritically and arrogantly do the same with others with absolutely no level of self awareness, reflection or humility. I won't presume to know your mind, though you pay no one the same courtesy, as to why that is though.
He’s regressed to the level of playground insults on here today.
That tells you everything you need to know.
Both of you dimly recognise that the country has been shipwrecked on Brexit. It is a national disaster and it will take generations to recover, however things pan out from here.
And you’re both culpable. You had the opportunity to stand for decency and against racism and you chose to indulge your hatred of the EU instead. The country is trapped by the xenophobic lies you endorsed.
I stand for decency, oppose racism and also favour our departure from the EU.
Much as it might pain you to hear it you don’t have a monopoly on truth or being right. Whilst you’re certainly very clever and insightful, you’re not quite as clever and insightful as you think you are: yes, you’ve made some excellent calls, and you’ve also got it very badly wrong on more than one occasion.
This is one of those times, and that’s ok:we’re all human.
I just feel sorry for you when you get like this. It’s not healthy for you to lash out at others who disagree with you with such anger and personal bitterness.
You decided that “favouring our departure from the EU” was more important than confronting racism. I expect you would think that any Labour supporters who are thinking of voting Labour to support the poorest in society should prioritise opposing anti-Semitism. It’s not healthy to be so hypocritical.
Seeing as the whole Finklestein thesis depends on a detailed textural analysis it's worth looking at the text. The bar for racism has never been lower since Bannon Trump Boris and the Brexiteers Robinson Netanyahu etc etc so this should be judged against that backdrop...
“The other evening we had a meeting in parliament in which Manuel [the Palestinian ambassador] made an incredibly powerful and passionate and effective speech about the history of Palestine and the rights of the Palestinian people. This was dutifully recorded by the – the thankfully silent Zionists who were in the audience on that occasion, and then came up and berated him afterwards for what he had said. They clearly have two problems: one is they don’t want to study history and secondly having lived in this country for a very long time, probably all their lives, they don’t understand English irony either. They needed two lessons, which we could perhaps help them with.”
But apparently Manuel Hassassian *is* a master of English irony, despite never living here at all? And as for that last sentence - I have rarely read anything nastier.
It seems to me that he/they had problems with some in the audience who gave the Palestinian speakers a hard time which explains the 'they' and 'them'. In other words he was not generically referring to Jews but to the objectors. The last line as you say is sinister and a little chilling
Think about it like this: if you accused a specific Muslim of not understanding the British despite having lived here all their life then then you have said that they aren’t really British. That is textbook racism.
And any politician doing so would be headline news and finished.
And yet you are so content to frequently, misleadingly, hypocritically and arrogantly do the same with others with absolutely no level of self awareness, reflection or humility. I won't presume to know your mind, though you pay no one the same courtesy, as to why that is though.
He’s regressed to the level of playground insults on here today.
That tells you everything you need to know.
Both of you dimly recognise that the country has been shipwrecked on Brexit. It is a national disaster and it will take generations to recover, however things pan out from here.
And you’re both culpable. You had the opportunity to stand for decency and against racism and you chose to indulge your hatred of the EU instead. The country is trapped by the xenophobic lies you endorsed.
I stand for decency, oppose racism and also favour our departure from the EU.
Much as it might pain you to hear it you don’t have a monopoly on truth or being right. Whilst you’re certainly very clever and insightful, you’re not quite as clever and insightful as you think you are: yes, you’ve made some excellent calls, and you’ve also got it very badly wrong on more than one occasion.
This is one of those times, and that’s ok:we’re all human.
I just feel sorry for you when you get like this. It’s not healthy for you to lash out at others who disagree with you with such anger and personal bitterness.
You decided that “favouring our departure from the EU” was more important than confronting racism. I expect you would think that any Labour supporters who are thinking of voting Labour to support the poorest in society should prioritise opposing anti-Semitism. It’s not healthy to be so hypocritical.
I find that a quite disgraceful allegation. You're an apologist for 60% youth unemployment, the horrors that have befallen Greece and Southern Europe more widely thanks to the absolutely fatally flawed design of the Euro. You're also quite happy to overlook all the corruption within the EU, and the huge demographic deficits in that organisation. What a miserable track record to have to defend, without mentioning the horrors of the CAP or the CFP or a lot else for that matter. Sheeeeeeesh!
And yet you are so content to frequently, misleadingly, hypocritically and arrogantly do the same with others with absolutely no level of self awareness, reflection or humility. I won't presume to know your mind, though you pay no one the same courtesy, as to why that is though.
He’s regressed to the level of playground insults on here today.
That tells you everything you need to know.
Both of you dimly recognise that the country has been shipwrecked on Brexit. It is a national disaster and it will take generations to recover, however things pan out from here.
And you’re both culpable. You had the opportunity to stand for decency and against racism and you chose to indulge your hatred of the EU instead. The country is trapped by the xenophobic lies you endorsed.
I stand for decency, oppose racism and also favour our departure from the EU.
Much as it might pain you to hear it you don’t have a monopoly on truth or being right. Whilst you’re certainly very clever and insightful, you’re not quite as clever and insightful as you think you are: yes, you’ve made some excellent calls, and you’ve also got it very badly wrong on more than one occasion.
This is one of those times, and that’s ok:we’re all human.
I just feel sorry for you when you get like this. It’s not healthy for you to lash out at others who disagree with you with such anger and personal bitterness.
You decided that “favouring our departure from the EU” was more important than confronting racism. I expect you would think that any Labour supporters who are thinking of voting Labour to support the poorest in society should prioritise opposing anti-Semitism. It’s not healthy to be so hypocritical.
No. I made no such decision.
That’s exactly what you did. The vote to Leave was correctly interpreted as a primarily anti-immigration movement (whipped up by xenophobic lies), to be responded to accordingly. Your entirely separate reasons for hating the EU were lost in the noise: your vote inevitably endorsed the thrust of the campaign.
And yet you are so content to frequently, misleadingly, hypocritically and arrogantly do the same with others with absolutely no level of self awareness, reflection or humility. I won't presume to know your mind, though you pay no one the same courtesy, as to why that is though.
He’s regressed to the level of playground insults on here today.
That tells you everything you need to know.
Both of you dimly recognise that the country has been shipwrecked on Brexit. It is a national disaster and it will take generations to recover, however things pan out from here.
And you’re both culpable. You had the opportunity to stand for decency and against racism and you chose to indulge your hatred of the EU instead. The country is trapped by the xenophobic lies you endorsed.
I stand for decency, oppose racism and also favour our departure from the EU.
Much as it might pain you to hear it you don’t have a monopoly on truth or being right. Whilst you’re certainly very clever and insightful, you’re not quite as clever and insightful as you think you are: yes, you’ve made some excellent calls, and you’ve also got it very badly wrong on more than one occasion.
This is one of those times, and that’s ok:we’re all human.
I just feel sorry for you when you get like this. It’s not healthy for you to lash out at others who disagree with you with such anger and personal bitterness.
You decided that “favouring our departure from the EU” was more important than confronting racism. I expect you would think that any Labour supporters who are thinking of voting Labour to support the poorest in society should prioritise opposing anti-Semitism. It’s not healthy to be so hypocritical.
No. I made no such decision.
You are wasting your time trying to engage with him in his current frame of mind.
I’ve heard enough times from the far right/Tommy Robinson that I can’t be British because my loyalties lie towards Mecca.
Labour must be so proud.
Next Corbyn’s team will be using the line that the absolute boy cannot be a racist because Judaism/Zionism isn’t a race.
It’s the same line the far right make when they say Islam isn’t a race.
When I was much younger I used to hear from some people that Catholics couldn’t be properly British because they were somehow “foreign” and owed their loyalty to the Pope. I had’t heard that for a while until quite recently.
It is scapegoating of unpopular minorities. But according to @NickPalmer we should not be worried because Labour represents the cultural zeitgeist and not the nasty racism of previous decades. He was talking garbage, of course.
Isn't that what Eagles says about JRM?
Its what JRM says about JRM:
...as a Catholic father-of-six he has consistently opposed gay marriage. In 2013, he said that on same sex partnerships, “I take my whip from the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church rather than the [Conservative] Whip’s Office.”
That does not make him foreign or unBritish. It simply means that on matters of Catholic doctrine he follows Catholic doctrine. There is a subtle but important difference between that and suggesting that Catholics owe their primary loyalty to a foriegn state or power -and are therefore unBritish.
The level of discourse has descended. All because of one topic - yet again.
Could we have a break from it over the bank holiday? Think of it as the August Truce.
Please.
I'm generally of the view that even if provoked, even when the intention is to provoke to salve an emotional hurt, responding to that provocation is still ultimately the responsibility and shame of the person reacting, so I apologise for adding to the lowering of the discourse. I even know it is what some people want to make themselves feel better, that couldn't be more obvious, and I still fall for it. I'd hope to be better than that.
You are to be fair - but some of the posts I have read today have been beyond anything that is acceptable and I second Oxfordsimon requests for a truce over the weekend
I really do try not to be abusive or use unnecessary language as it is evidence of a very poor argument
I do not participate on twitter but follow many on it and the extent of the fury against Corbyn coming from all sides and especially his own since his recent comments do seem to indicate a tsunami of objection to him and could indicate a groundswell of real opposition to him and his cabal
Given we have no numbers at all, I’d support a wide ranging survey of Labour members (large sample size). You might be right.
This trend in the YouGov Right/Wrong figures for C2DE voters looks noteworthy.
Interesting, but why are PBers fixated on this demographic when it’s one person, one vote? As you yourself said, treating C2DEs as some sort of bloc is a fool’s errand.
This trend in the YouGov Right/Wrong figures for C2DE voters looks noteworthy.
Interesting, but why are PBers fixated on this demographic when it’s one person, one vote? As you yourself said, treating C2DEs as some sort of bloc is a fool’s errand.
And yet you are so content to frequently, misleadingly, hypocritically and arrogantly do the same with others with absolutely no level of self awareness, reflection or humility. I won't presume to know your mind, though you pay no one the same courtesy, as to why that is though.
He’s regressed to the level of playground insults on here today.
That tells you everything you need to know.
Both of you dimly recognise that the country has been shipwrecked on Brexit. It is a national disaster and it will take generations to recover, however things pan out from here.
And you’re both culpable. You had the opportunity to stand for decency and against racism and you chose to indulge your hatred of the EU instead. The country is trapped by the xenophobic lies you endorsed.
I stand for decency, oppose racism and also favour our departure from the EU.
Much as it might pain you to hear it you don’t have a monopoly on truth or being right. Whilst you’re certainly very clever and insightful, you’re not quite as clever and insightful as you think you are: yes, you’ve made some excellent calls, and you’ve also got it very badly wrong on more than one occasion.
This is one of those times, and that’s ok:we’re all human.
I just feel sorry for you when you get like this. It’s not healthy for you to lash out at others who disagree with you with such anger and personal bitterness.
You decided that “favouring our departure from the EU” was more important than confronting racism. I expect you would think that any Labour supporters who are thinking of voting Labour to support the poorest in society should prioritise opposing anti-Semitism. It’s not healthy to be so hypocritical.
No. I made no such decision.
You are wasting your time trying to engage with him in his current frame of mind.
I actually really like Alastair, and have a soft spot for him.
But I think you’re right: I’m going to leave it for now, and save it for another day.
The level of discourse has descended. All because of one topic - yet again.
Could we have a break from it over the bank holiday? Think of it as the August Truce.
Please.
I'm generally of the view that even if provoked, even when the intention is to provoke to salve an emotional hurt, responding to that provocation is still ultimately the responsibility and shame of the person reacting, so I apologise for adding to the lowering of the discourse. I even know it is what some people want to make themselves feel better, that couldn't be more obvious, and I still fall for it. I'd hope to be better than that.
You are to be fair - but some of the posts I have read today have been beyond anything that is acceptable and I second Oxfordsimon requests for a truce over the weekend
I really do try not to be abusive or use unnecessary language as it is evidence of a very poor argument
I do not participate on twitter but follow many on it and the extent of the fury against Corbyn coming from all sides and especially his own since his recent comments do seem to indicate a tsunami of objection to him and could indicate a groundswell of real opposition to him and his cabal
Given we have no numbers at all, I’d support a wide ranging survey of Labour members (large sample size). You might be right.
And of course it must be having a negative effect on voters even if it is not showing in the polls yet
This trend in the YouGov Right/Wrong figures for C2DE voters looks noteworthy.
At the time of the referendum there was a party dedicated to leaving the EU polling around 18-19%. They are currently virtually invisible. Do you think that has any effect on the trend you cite?
This trend in the YouGov Right/Wrong figures for C2DE voters looks noteworthy.
Interesting, but why are PBers fixated on this demographic when it’s one person, one vote? As you yourself said, treating C2DEs as some sort of bloc is a fool’s errand.
That's true, but I think it's relevant for debunking the de haut en bas argument from elite Brexiteers that the people must get what they voted for at any cost.
This trend in the YouGov Right/Wrong figures for C2DE voters looks noteworthy.
Interesting, but why are PBers fixated on this demographic when it’s one person, one vote? As you yourself said, treating C2DEs as some sort of bloc is a fool’s errand.
That's true, but I think it's relevant for debunking the de haut en bas argument from elite Brexiteers that the people must get what they voted for at any cost.
And yet you are so content to frequently, misleadingly, hypocritically and arrogantly do the same with others with absolutely no level of self awareness, reflection or humility. I won't presume to know your mind, though you pay no one the same courtesy, as to why that is though.
He’s regressed to the level of playground insults on here today.
That tells you everything you need to know.
Both of you dimly recognise that the country has been shipwrecked on Brexit. It is a national disaster and it will take generations to recover, however things pan out from here.
And you’re both culpable. You had the opportunity to stand for decency and against racism and you chose to indulge your hatred of the EU instead. The country is trapped by the xenophobic lies you endorsed.
I stand for decency, oppose racism and also favour our departure from the EU.
Much as it might pain you to hear it you don’t have a monopoly on truth or being right. Whilst you’re certainly very clever and insightful, you’re not quite as clever and insightful as you think you are: yes, you’ve made some excellent calls, and you’ve also got it very badly wrong on more than one occasion.
This is one of those times, and that’s ok:we’re all human.
I just feel sorry for you when you get like this. It’s not healthy for you to lash out at others who disagree with you with such anger and personal bitterness.
You decided that “favouring our departure from the EU” was more important than confronting racism. I expect you would think that any Labour supporters who are thinking of voting Labour to support the poorest in society should prioritise opposing anti-Semitism. It’s not healthy to be so hypocritical.
No. I made no such decision.
You are wasting your time trying to engage with him in his current frame of mind.
I actually really like Alastair, and have a soft spot for him.
But I think you’re right: I’m going to leave it for now, and save it for another day.
Alastair was very supportive to me when I came under fire once.
He does contribute enormously and I do respect him even though I think he pushes xenophobia too far
Does anybody know or could hazard a guess at the gender of the complainants in Salmond case?
They’ve been stated to be women in one report I saw. (I wondered too.)
It doesn't really matter though does it?
If the complainants were male then it'd be difficult for Mr Salmond in that there might be aspects of his life that he'd chosen to keep secret which might then become public, but I suspect that he has no reason to fear any such exposure.
This trend in the YouGov Right/Wrong figures for C2DE voters looks noteworthy.
Interesting, but why are PBers fixated on this demographic when it’s one person, one vote? As you yourself said, treating C2DEs as some sort of bloc is a fool’s errand.
The level of discourse has descended. All because of one topic - yet again.
Could we have a break from it over the bank holiday? Think of it as the August Truce.
Please.
Discussion of best pizza toppings? It’s Pineapple of course....;-)
There is nothing that is enhanced by the presence of pineapple. Nothing I tell you!
(It ranks alongside coconut as one of my most hated flavours!)
When Columbus brought the first pineapple back from the Americas for the King of Spain, it isn't generally know that he brought a second back as a gift for his mamma in Genoa, who served it on pizza for the family. Dating back to the early 1500s that makes it a very authentic topping, pre-dating the evolution of the modern pizza by some two hundred years.
This trend in the YouGov Right/Wrong figures for C2DE voters looks noteworthy.
Interesting, but why are PBers fixated on this demographic when it’s one person, one vote? As you yourself said, treating C2DEs as some sort of bloc is a fool’s errand.
The campaign for Brexit was won on anti immigrant sentiment. The campaign against Corbyn is being run using accusations of anti Jewish sentiment. The anti immigrant stuff would appear in pro Brexit papers, it was used to campaign for it. The anti Jewish stuff in regards to Corbyn is wrote by anti Corbyn papers/journalists. It is used to campaign against Corbyn.
The charge of hypocrisy can be correctly made to Brexit supporters who are up in arms about Corbyn but not the other way around. It is those against Corbyn who bring up Corbyn and anti-Jewish sentiment, it is was a vote winner for him they wouldn't do it, it is those who were in favour of Brexit who would bring up anti immigration stuff and push it because it was a vote winner for them.
The recent storm about Boris wasn't because 15 years ago he made a negative reference to burka's or because he attended a conference with someone who had, the storm was because he decided to write about them in a national newspaper today (or it was today a couple of weeks back) he wanted this to be publicly discussed, this wasn't brought to attention by his opponents. There weren't barely attended or publicised meetings were Brexiteers discussed the possibilities of reducing immigration and their opponents put it in national newspapers to accuse them of racism. The campaign was front and centre, deliberately so.
Edit: As for David Duke if we are to take him at his word he prefers May to Corbyn, not that facts matter when it comes to smearing Corbyn.....
The campaign for Brexit was won on anti immigrant sentiment. The campaign against Corbyn is being run using accusations of anti Jewish sentiment. The anti immigrant stuff would appear in pro Brexit papers, it was used to campaign for it. The anti Jewish stuff in regards to Corbyn is wrote by anti Corbyn papers/journalists. It is used to campaign against Corbyn.
The charge of hypocrisy can be correctly made to Brexit supporters who are up in arms about Corbyn but not the other way around. It is those against Corbyn who bring up Corbyn and anti-Jewish sentiment, it is was a vote winner for him they wouldn't do it, it is those who were in favour of Brexit who would bring up anti immigration stuff and push it because it was a vote winner for them.
The recent storm about Boris wasn't because 15 years ago he made a negative reference to burka's or because he attended a conference with someone who had, the storm was because he decided to write about them in a national newspaper today (or it was today a couple of weeks back) he wanted this to be publicly discussed, this wasn't brought to attention by his opponents. There weren't barely attended or publicised meetings were Brexiteers discussed the possibilities of reducing immigration and their opponents put it in national newspapers to accuse them of racism. The campaign was front and centre, deliberately so.
Your defence seems to be that unlike Boris, who is pretending to be racist to win votes, Corbyn really means it?
The campaign for Brexit was won on anti immigrant sentiment. The campaign against Corbyn is being run using accusations of anti Jewish sentiment. The anti immigrant stuff would appear in pro Brexit papers, it was used to campaign for it. The anti Jewish stuff in regards to Corbyn is wrote by anti Corbyn papers/journalists. It is used to campaign against Corbyn.
The charge of hypocrisy can be correctly made to Brexit supporters who are up in arms about Corbyn but not the other way around. It is those against Corbyn who bring up Corbyn and anti-Jewish sentiment, it is was a vote winner for him they wouldn't do it, it is those who were in favour of Brexit who would bring up anti immigration stuff and push it because it was a vote winner for them.
The recent storm about Boris wasn't because 15 years ago he made a negative reference to burka's or because he attended a conference with someone who had, the storm was because he decided to write about them in a national newspaper today (or it was today a couple of weeks back) he wanted this to be publicly discussed, this wasn't brought to attention by his opponents. There weren't barely attended or publicised meetings were Brexiteers discussed the possibilities of reducing immigration and their opponents put it in national newspapers to accuse them of racism. The campaign was front and centre, deliberately so.
What about those of us including me who voted leave on economic grounds (3pc of leave voters) and those that voted leave on democratic and or sovereignty grounds (around 30pc of leave voters IIRC)?!
The campaign for Brexit was won on anti immigrant sentiment. The campaign against Corbyn is being run using accusations of anti Jewish sentiment. The anti immigrant stuff would appear in pro Brexit papers, it was used to campaign for it. The anti Jewish stuff in regards to Corbyn is wrote by anti Corbyn papers/journalists. It is used to campaign against Corbyn.
The charge of hypocrisy can be correctly made to Brexit supporters who are up in arms about Corbyn but not the other way around. It is those against Corbyn who bring up Corbyn and anti-Jewish sentiment, it is was a vote winner for him they wouldn't do it, it is those who were in favour of Brexit who would bring up anti immigration stuff and push it because it was a vote winner for them.
The recent storm about Boris wasn't because 15 years ago he made a negative reference to burka's or because he attended a conference with someone who had, the storm was because he decided to write about them in a national newspaper today (or it was today a couple of weeks back) he wanted this to be publicly discussed, this wasn't brought to attention by his opponents. There weren't barely attended or publicised meetings were Brexiteers discussed the possibilities of reducing immigration and their opponents put it in national newspapers to accuse them of racism. The campaign was front and centre, deliberately so.
Edit: As for David Duke if we are to take him at his word he prefers May to Corbyn, not that facts matter when it comes to smearing Corbyn.....
On my twitter feed it seems to be coming from many labour supporters and labour supporting journalists - no need to interfer as labour fights it's own civil war
The level of discourse has descended. All because of one topic - yet again.
Could we have a break from it over the bank holiday? Think of it as the August Truce.
Please.
Discussion of best pizza toppings? It’s Pineapple of course....;-)
There is nothing that is enhanced by the presence of pineapple. Nothing I tell you!
(It ranks alongside coconut as one of my most hated flavours!)
When Columbus brought the first pineapple back from the Americas for the King of Spain, it isn't generally know that he brought a second back as a gift for his mamma in Genoa, who served it on pizza for the family. Dating back to the early 1500s that makes it a very authentic topping, pre-dating the evolution of the modern pizza by some two hundred years.
Seems like I'm spamming the forum, but IanB2 someone has to say that this was a good post.
The campaign for Brexit was won on anti immigrant sentiment. The campaign against Corbyn is being run using accusations of anti Jewish sentiment. The anti immigrant stuff would appear in pro Brexit papers, it was used to campaign for it. The anti Jewish stuff in regards to Corbyn is wrote by anti Corbyn papers/journalists. It is used to campaign against Corbyn.
The charge of hypocrisy can be correctly made to Brexit supporters who are up in arms about Corbyn but not the other way around. It is those against Corbyn who bring up Corbyn and anti-Jewish sentiment, it is was a vote winner for him they wouldn't do it, it is those who were in favour of Brexit who would bring up anti immigration stuff and push it because it was a vote winner for them.
The recent storm about Boris wasn't because 15 years ago he made a negative reference to burka's or because he attended a conference with someone who had, the storm was because he decided to write about them in a national newspaper today (or it was today a couple of weeks back) he wanted this to be publicly discussed, this wasn't brought to attention by his opponents. There weren't barely attended or publicised meetings were Brexiteers discussed the possibilities of reducing immigration and their opponents put it in national newspapers to accuse them of racism. The campaign was front and centre, deliberately so.
I think that the antisemitic stench that's come out of LAB under Corbyn's leader is appalling. My parliamentary seat flips from LAB>CON>LAB and under the new boundaries would have a notional GE17 result of just a NINE vote margin. I've tactically voted Labour for the past two general elections. Next time, be assured my vote will not go to the Jew haters.
The campaign for Brexit was won on anti immigrant sentiment. The campaign against Corbyn is being run using accusations of anti Jewish sentiment. The anti immigrant stuff would appear in pro Brexit papers, it was used to campaign for it. The anti Jewish stuff in regards to Corbyn is wrote by anti Corbyn papers/journalists. It is used to campaign against Corbyn.
The charge of hypocrisy can be correctly made to Brexit supporters who are up in arms about Corbyn but not the other way around. It is those against Corbyn who bring up Corbyn and anti-Jewish sentiment, it is was a vote winner for him they wouldn't do it, it is those who were in favour of Brexit who would bring up anti immigration stuff and push it because it was a vote winner for them.
The recent storm about Boris wasn't because 15 years ago he made a negative reference to burka's or because he attended a conference with someone who had, the storm was because he decided to write about them in a national newspaper today (or it was today a couple of weeks back) he wanted this to be publicly discussed, this wasn't brought to attention by his opponents. There weren't barely attended or publicised meetings were Brexiteers discussed the possibilities of reducing immigration and their opponents put it in national newspapers to accuse them of racism. The campaign was front and centre, deliberately so.
Your defence seems to be that unlike Boris, who is pretending to be racist to win votes, Corbyn really means it?
That would be a truly epic defence.
It would rival the politician in the eighteenth century (apologies, forget his name) who said he couldn't have been involved in beating up a political opponent because he was banging said opponent's wife at the time.
@justin124 yes, I meant Prentice. You referred to Alan Browne (I think) - yes he did join the Conservatives eventually but only after quite a long spell as an independent and being deselected by his local party.
Re Dawkins, @Anazina is correct, he does criticise Muslims/Islam, but not very often. This is probably however not because he is frit. He says they are of less interest to him because he knows less about them than he does about Christians (in which incidentally he is completely wrong, but that's scarcely unusual for a man whose repeated blunders, bullying and intellectual incoherence earned him the nickname among actual scholars of the All-Mighty Dawk). However, he did memorably condemn an atheist women for complaining about being sexually harassed in a lift, on the basis that FGM in the Muslim world was a more serious problem to deal with.
I saw a very strange and disturbing sight today - a full train at Llandrindod Wells at midday. Admittedly it was a one-car 153 but it still shook me.
The campaign for Brexit was won on anti immigrant sentiment. The campaign against Corbyn is being run using accusations of anti Jewish sentiment. The anti immigrant stuff would appear in pro Brexit papers, it was used to campaign for it. The anti Jewish stuff in regards to Corbyn is wrote by anti Corbyn papers/journalists. It is used to campaign against Corbyn.
The charge of hypocrisy can be correctly made to Brexit supporters who are up in arms about Corbyn but not the other way around. It is those against Corbyn who bring up Corbyn and anti-Jewish sentiment, it is was a vote winner for him they wouldn't do it, it is those who were in favour of Brexit who would bring up anti immigration stuff and push it because it was a vote winner for them.
The recent storm about Boris wasn't because 15 years ago he made a negative reference to burka's or because he attended a conference with someone who had, the storm was because he decided to write about them in a national newspaper today (or it was today a couple of weeks back) he wanted this to be publicly discussed, this wasn't brought to attention by his opponents. There weren't barely attended or publicised meetings were Brexiteers discussed the possibilities of reducing immigration and their opponents put it in national newspapers to accuse them of racism. The campaign was front and centre, deliberately so.
What about those of us including me who voted leave on economic grounds (3pc of leave voters) and those that voted leave on democratic and or sovereignty grounds (around 30pc of leave voters IIRC)?!
I have never accused leave voters of being racist, plenty of good reasons to vote leave which have nothing to do with immigration. There are leave voters whose opinions (or who as people) I respect and like.
Also even those who did vote on immigration, fair enough. There is nothing in itself morally wrong with wanting reduced (or different) immigration, I would make a morality argument for refugees but even that wouldn't necessarily be racist but perhaps selfish instead.
My comment refers to parts of the Brexit campaign and its leaders.
The campaign for Brexit was won on anti immigrant sentiment. The campaign against Corbyn is being run using accusations of anti Jewish sentiment. The anti immigrant stuff would appear in pro Brexit papers, it was used to campaign for it. The anti Jewish stuff in regards to Corbyn is wrote by anti Corbyn papers/journalists. It is used to campaign against Corbyn.
The charge of hypocrisy can be correctly made to Brexit supporters who are up in arms about Corbyn but not the other way around. It is those against Corbyn who bring up Corbyn and anti-Jewish sentiment, it is was a vote winner for him they wouldn't do it, it is those who were in favour of Brexit who would bring up anti immigration stuff and push it because it was a vote winner for them.
The recent storm about Boris wasn't because 15 years ago he made a negative reference to burka's or because he attended a conference with someone who had, the storm was because he decided to write about them in a national newspaper today (or it was today a couple of weeks back) he wanted this to be publicly discussed, this wasn't brought to attention by his opponents. There weren't barely attended or publicised meetings were Brexiteers discussed the possibilities of reducing immigration and their opponents put it in national newspapers to accuse them of racism. The campaign was front and centre, deliberately so.
I think that the antisemitic stench that's come out of LAB under Corbyn's leader is appalling. My parliamentary seat flips from LAB>CON>LAB and under the new boundaries would have a notional GE17 result of just a NINE vote margin. I've tactically voted Labour for the past two general elections. Next time, be assured my vote will not go to the Jew haters.
You'll be tactically voting Tory to keep them out in Bedford then? ! What is the world coming to? !
The campaign for Brexit was won on anti immigrant sentiment. The campaign against Corbyn is being run using accusations of anti Jewish sentiment. The anti immigrant stuff would appear in pro Brexit papers, it was used to campaign for it. The anti Jewish stuff in regards to Corbyn is wrote by anti Corbyn papers/journalists. It is used to campaign against Corbyn.
The charge of hypocrisy can be correctly made to Brexit supporters who are up in arms about Corbyn but not the other way around. It is those against Corbyn who bring up Corbyn and anti-Jewish sentiment, it is was a vote winner for him they wouldn't do it, it is those who were in favour of Brexit who would bring up anti immigration stuff and push it because it was a vote winner for them.
The recent storm about Boris wasn't because 15 years ago he made a negative reference to burka's or because he attended a conference with someone who had, the storm was because he decided to write about them in a national newspaper today (or it was today a couple of weeks back) he wanted this to be publicly discussed, this wasn't brought to attention by his opponents. There weren't barely attended or publicised meetings were Brexiteers discussed the possibilities of reducing immigration and their opponents put it in national newspapers to accuse them of racism. The campaign was front and centre, deliberately so.
Your defence seems to be that unlike Boris, who is pretending to be racist to win votes, Corbyn really means it?
I think Corbyn genuinely does oppose the occupation of Palestine and doesn't try to stir up anti Jewish sentiment to win votes but his opponents imply it to try and lose him votes.
I think Boris probably does genuinely dislike the Burka and is happy to stir up anti Muslim sentiment to win votes.
The campaign for Brexit was won on anti immigrant sentiment. The campaign against Corbyn is being run using accusations of anti Jewish sentiment. The anti immigrant stuff would appear in pro Brexit papers, it was used to campaign for it. The anti Jewish stuff in regards to Corbyn is wrote by anti Corbyn papers/journalists. It is used to campaign against Corbyn.
The charge of hypocrisy can be correctly made to Brexit supporters who are up in arms about Corbyn but not the other way around. It is those against Corbyn who bring up Corbyn and anti-Jewish sentiment, it is was a vote winner for him they wouldn't do it, it is those who were in favour of Brexit who would bring up anti immigration stuff and push it because it was a vote winner for them.
The recent storm about Boris wasn't because 15 years ago he made a negative reference to burka's or because he attended a conference with someone who had, the storm was because he decided to write about them in a national newspaper today (or it was today a couple of weeks back) he wanted this to be publicly discussed, this wasn't brought to attention by his opponents. There weren't barely attended or publicised meetings were Brexiteers discussed the possibilities of reducing immigration and their opponents put it in national newspapers to accuse them of racism. The campaign was front and centre, deliberately so.
I think that the antisemitic stench that's come out of LAB under Corbyn's leader is appalling. My parliamentary seat flips from LAB>CON>LAB and under the new boundaries would have a notional GE17 result of just a NINE vote margin. I've tactically voted Labour for the past two general elections. Next time, be assured my vote will not go to the Jew haters.
Which is why I think it is the angle Corbyn's opponents have chosen, early attempts at calling him a misogynist and a communist fell flat this is one where they have had far more joy.
Edit: Unrelated to the rest of my post but I'm sorry to hear about McCain, as Republicans go there aren't many (or perhaps any) I can think of that I have more respect for or would like as president over the others. What a life story as well. Hope he has a good an end as possible.
Being seen as favouring Muslims over Jews isn't going to be a game changing vote loser for Corbyn any more than being seen to be anti immigrant was for Leave. The only people horrified are those who want him out anyway. His supporters will frame it as him sticking up for the little guy.
"One mans freedom fighter is another's terrorist..."
To be PM of the UK you have to empathise with everyone. Corbyn simply does not
I don't think that first sentence stands up to be honest.
So which British citizens does TM not stand up for
The ones she labelled citizens of nowhere.
So tax avoiders then?
She is a Prime Minister for prejudiced provincials. She offers nothing to anyone who lives and works inside the M25 or other urban areas,
Not true. But your own prejudice won’t let you understand that
Thinking that only tax avoiders would consider themselves citizens of the world is a prime example of lack of empathy.
Others would be the dementia tax, go home vans, not bothering to meet Grenfell survivors
As always the words around the phrase matter:
“Too many people in positions of power behave as if they have more in common with international elites than with the people down the road, the people they employ, the people they pass in the street. But if you believe you’re a citizen of the world you’re a citizen of nowhere. You don’t even understand what the word ‘citizenship’ means”
It’s quite clear that she is saying people need to contribute and engage with their community and society
The campaign for Brexit was won on anti immigrant sentiment. The campaign against Corbyn is being run using accusations of anti Jewish sentiment. The anti immigrant stuff would appear in pro Brexit papers, it was used to campaign for it. The anti Jewish stuff in regards to Corbyn is wrote by anti Corbyn papers/journalists. It is used to campaign against Corbyn.
The charge of hypocrisy can be correctly made to Brexit supporters who are up in arms about Corbyn but not the other way around. It is those against Corbyn who bring up Corbyn and anti-Jewish sentiment, it is was a vote winner for him they wouldn't do it, it is those who were in favour of Brexit who would bring up anti immigration stuff and push it because it was a vote winner for them.
The recent storm about Boris wasn't because 15 years ago he made a negative reference to burka's or because he attended a conference with someone who had, the storm was because he decided to write about them in a national newspaper today (or it was today a couple of weeks back) he wanted this to be publicly discussed, this wasn't brought to attention by his opponents. There weren't barely attended or publicised meetings were Brexiteers discussed the possibilities of reducing immigration and their opponents put it in national newspapers to accuse them of racism. The campaign was front and centre, deliberately so.
I think that the antisemitic stench that's come out of LAB under Corbyn's leader is appalling. My parliamentary seat flips from LAB>CON>LAB and under the new boundaries would have a notional GE17 result of just a NINE vote margin. I've tactically voted Labour for the past two general elections. Next time, be assured my vote will not go to the Jew haters.
Which is why I think it is the angle Corbyn's opponents have chosen, early attempts at calling him a misogynist and a communist fell flat this is one where they have had far more joy.
There is no joy in this. Corbyn is taking labour down the abyss and sooner or later his moderate mps will go, probably after Brexit
The campaign for Brexit was won on anti immigrant sentiment. The campaign against Corbyn is being run using accusations of anti Jewish sentiment. The anti immigrant stuff would appear in pro Brexit papers, it was used to campaign for it. The anti Jewish stuff in regards to Corbyn is wrote by anti Corbyn papers/journalists. It is used to campaign against Corbyn.
The charge of hypocrisy can be correctly made to Brexit supporters who are up in arms about Corbyn but not the other way around. It is those against Corbyn who bring up Corbyn and anti-Jewish sentiment, it is was a vote winner for him they wouldn't do it, it is those who were in favour of Brexit who would bring up anti immigration stuff and push it because it was a vote winner for them.
The recent storm about Boris wasn't because 15 years ago he made a negative reference to burka's or because he attended a conference with someone who had, the storm was because he decided to write about them in a national newspaper today (or it was today a couple of weeks back) he wanted this to be publicly discussed, this wasn't brought to attention by his opponents. There weren't barely attended or publicised meetings were Brexiteers discussed the possibilities of reducing immigration and their opponents put it in national newspapers to accuse them of racism. The campaign was front and centre, deliberately so.
Your defence seems to be that unlike Boris, who is pretending to be racist to win votes, Corbyn really means it?
I think Corbyn genuinely does oppose the occupation of Palestine and doesn't try to stir up anti Jewish sentiment to win votes but his opponents imply it to try and lose him votes.
The question seems to be whether Corbyn is solely anti-Israel, or does he in fact conflate support of Israel with being Jewish, and use it as a dog-whistle for underlying anti-Semitism?
To my mind the Jewdas story fairly definitively shows that he does separate out Jewish from pro-Israel, and furthermore that many of the people attacking him do not.
In a statement issued on Friday night, he (corbyn) said he had used the term Zionist “in the accurate political sense and not as a euphemism for Jewish people”.
Being seen as favouring Muslims over Jews isn't going to be a game changing vote loser for Corbyn any more than being seen to be anti immigrant was for Leave. The only people horrified are those who want him out anyway. His supporters will frame it as him sticking up for the little guy.
"One mans freedom fighter is another's terrorist..."
To be PM of the UK you have to empathise with everyone. Corbyn simply does not
I don't think that first sentence stands up to be honest.
So which British citizens does TM not stand up for
The ones she labelled citizens of nowhere.
So tax avoiders then?
She is a Prime Minister for prejudiced provincials. She offers nothing to anyone who lives and works inside the M25 or other urban areas,
Not true. But your own prejudice won’t let you understand that
Take a look at the 2017 election results. There seem to be a lot of prejudiced people inside the M25 and other urban areas. Or perhaps they’ve got it right and the Conservatives have shrivelled into the party for ugly reactionaries.
One day, perhaps when we have an anti-Semitic prime minister, you will understand what you helped happen through your unwillingness to understand your fellow countrymen and women
I feel sorry for you, I really do. I hope you recover your equilibrium in due course
You have helped to wreck the country because you decided that it was more important to leave the EU than oppose xenophobic lies.
Instead of intoning piously at someone who would no more vote for Jeremy Corbyn than the current incarnation of the Conservative party, hellbent as it is on implementing shambolically the most damaging policy since the Second World War, reflect on your own part in this country’s long term decline.
You think it was xenophobia
I think people disliked economic competition and a lack of control of the direction of their society. They may be wrong, but there are valid reasons to oppose uncontrolled immigration.
Being seen as favouring Muslims over Jews isn't going to be a game changing vote loser for Corbyn any more than being seen to be anti immigrant was for Leave. The only people horrified are those who want him out anyway. His supporters will frame it as him sticking up for the little guy.
"One mans freedom fighter is another's terrorist..."
To be PM of the UK you have to empathise with everyone. Corbyn simply does not
I don't think that first sentence stands up to be honest.
So which British citizens does TM not stand up for
The ones she labelled citizens of nowhere.
So tax avoiders then?
She is a Prime Minister for prejudiced provincials. She offers nothing to anyone who lives and works inside the M25 or other urban areas,
Not true. But your own prejudice won’t let you understand that
Thinking that only tax avoiders would consider themselves citizens of the world is a prime example of lack of empathy.
Others would be the dementia tax, go home vans, not bothering to meet Grenfell survivors
As always the words around the phrase matter:
“Too many people in positions of power behave as if they have more in common with international elites than with the people down the road, the people they employ, the people they pass in the street. But if you believe you’re a citizen of the world you’re a citizen of nowhere. You don’t even understand what the word ‘citizenship’ means”
It’s quite clear that she is saying people need to contribute and engage with their community and society
Absolutely. And my point is that she did that in a way that anybody with an ounce of empathy for metropolitans would have known would get misinterpreted when, inevitably, it was reported out of context. Again, I'm not claiming, as Alistair does, that she was expressing an anti-Remainer sentiment. I'm saying the fact that she didn't realise how this would be wrongly interpreted is evidence of a lack of empathy.
For those that like opinion polls, the gigantic YouGov survey in tonight’s Standard might hold some interest. I am looking forward to HYUFD’s rebuttal of Peter Kellner, and predict it will involve something about C2DEs.
If Kellner's pre EU referendum polling had been right there would have been no Brexit as Remain would have won
You haven’t read his article, have you?
If you really are so stupid to thizarus
Okay, you haven’t grasped Kellner’s piece. Read it again.
This tactic would be a little less obnoxious if you'd at least include a link for the rest of us
I’m not a fan of opinion polling. But at least this survey benchmarks against June 2016 and has a very large sample size:
Kellner: “Moreover, YouGov polled people who reported their vote at the time of the referendum. This latest survey is able to compare how these same people, who backed Brexit by 52 to 48 per cent then, would vote today. The five-point increase in Remain support, from 48 per cent to 53 per cent today, is real.”
It also backs up the poll they did the previous week with a 10,000+ sample size that also showed 53/47 for Remain.
It's remarkable how much the figures for Leave are now dependent on Conservative voters. If they split the way they split in 2016 the majority for Remain would now be enormous. Just lifting the taboo against rethinking the Brexit decision could see a big swing to Remain.
What an absurd point.
The Tory vote will obviously not split the same way as 2016 as over 50% of the 2015 UKIP vote voted Tory in 2017 and most of them would still vote Tory even despite the Chequers Deal, while some of the Tory diehard Remainers have gone to the LDs
The campaign for Brexit was won on anti immigrant sentiment. The campaign against Corbyn is being run using accusations of anti Jewish sentiment. The anti immigrant stuff would appear in pro Brexit papers, it was used to campaign for it. The anti Jewish stuff in regards to Corbyn is wrote by anti Corbyn papers/journalists. It is used to campaign against Corbyn.
The charge of hypocrisy can be correctly made to Brexit supporters who are up in arms about Corbyn but not the other way around. It is those against Corbyn who bring up Corbyn and anti-Jewish sentiment, it is was a vote winner for him they wouldn't do it, it is those who were in favour of Brexit who would bring up anti immigration stuff and push it because it was a vote winner for them.
The recent storm about Boris wasn't because 15 years ago he made a negative reference to burka's or because he attended a conference with someone who had, the storm was because he decided to write about them in a national newspaper today (or it was today a couple of weeks back) he wanted this to be publicly discussed, this wasn't brought to attention by his opponents. There weren't barely attended or publicised meetings were Brexiteers discussed the possibilities of reducing immigration and their opponents put it in national newspapers to accuse them of racism. The campaign was front and centre, deliberately so.
Your defence seems to be that unlike Boris, who is pretending to be racist to win votes, Corbyn really means it?
I think Corbyn genuinely does oppose the occupation of Palestine and doesn't try to stir up anti Jewish sentiment to win votes but his opponents imply it to try and lose him votes.
The question seems to be whether Corbyn is solely anti-Israel, or does he in fact conflate support of Israel with being Jewish, and use it as a dog-whistle for underlying anti-Semitism?
To my mind the Jewdas story fairly definitively shows that he does separate out Jewish from pro-Israel, and furthermore that many of the people attacking him do not.
I think that is where the stories/angle/approach lost a lot of people.
The campaign for Brexit was won on anti immigrant sentiment. The campaign against Corbyn is being run using accusations of anti Jewish sentiment. The anti immigrant stuff would appear in pro Brexit papers, it was used to campaign for it. The anti Jewish stuff in regards to Corbyn is wrote by anti Corbyn papers/journalists. It is used to campaign against Corbyn.
The charge of hypocrisy can be correctly made to Brexit supporters who are up in arms about Corbyn but not the other way around. It is those against Corbyn who bring up Corbyn and anti-Jewish sentiment, it is was a vote winner for him they wouldn't do it, it is those who were in favour of Brexit who would bring up anti immigration stuff and push it because it was a vote winner for them.
The recent storm about Boris wasn't because 15 years ago he made a negative reference to burka's or because he attended a conference with someone who had, the storm was because he decided to write about them in a national newspaper today (or it was today a couple of weeks back) he wanted this to be publicly discussed, this wasn't brought to attention by his opponents. There weren't barely attended or publicised meetings were Brexiteers discussed the possibilities of reducing immigration and their opponents put it in national newspapers to accuse them of racism. The campaign was front and centre, deliberately so.
I think that the antisemitic stench that's come out of LAB under Corbyn's leader is appalling. My parliamentary seat flips from LAB>CON>LAB and under the new boundaries would have a notional GE17 result of just a NINE vote margin. I've tactically voted Labour for the past two general elections. Next time, be assured my vote will not go to the Jew haters.
You'll be tactically voting Tory to keep them out in Bedford then? ! What is the world coming to? !
I'll be voting LD.
I live in in ultra-marginal and my guess is that lots of LDs have tactically voted in general elections. How is Corbyn going to hang onto them? That's the electoral danger. There is a large party here and we've held the elected mayoralty for nine years. The Tory image is enhanced by Nadine being one of the Borough's MPs
The campaign for Brexit was won on anti immigrant sentiment. The campaign against Corbyn is being run using accusations of anti Jewish sentiment. The anti immigrant stuff would appear in pro Brexit papers, it was used to campaign for it. The anti Jewish stuff in regards to Corbyn is wrote by anti Corbyn papers/journalists. It is used to campaign against Corbyn.
The charge of hypocrisy can be correctly made to Brexit supporters who are up in arms about Corbyn but not the other way around. It is those against Corbyn who bring up Corbyn and anti-Jewish sentiment, it is was a vote winner for him they wouldn't do it, it is those who were in favour of Brexit who would bring up anti immigration stuff and push it because it was a vote winner for them.
The recent storm about Boris wasn't because 15 years ago he made a negative reference to burka's or because he attended a conference with someone who had, the storm was because he decided to write about them in a national newspaper today (or it was today a couple of weeks back) he wanted this to be publicly discussed, this wasn't brought to attention by his opponents. There weren't barely attended or publicised meetings were Brexiteers discussed the possibilities of reducing immigration and their opponents put it in national newspapers to accuse them of racism. The campaign was front and centre, deliberately so.
Your defence seems to be that unlike Boris, who is pretending to be racist to win votes, Corbyn really means it?
I think Corbyn genuinely does oppose the occupation of Palestine and doesn't try to stir up anti Jewish sentiment to win votes but his opponents imply it to try and lose him votes.
The question seems to be whether Corbyn is solely anti-Israel, or does he in fact conflate support of Israel with being Jewish, and use it as a dog-whistle for underlying anti-Semitism?
To my mind the Jewdas story fairly definitively shows that he does separate out Jewish from pro-Israel, and furthermore that many of the people attacking him do not.
I think that is where the stories/angle/approach lost a lot of people.
Right. That's why they stopped and waited a few months to forget before coming back to it.
For those that like opinion polls, the gigantic YouGov survey in tonight’s Standard might hold some interest. I am looking forward to HYUFD’s rebuttal of Peter Kellner, and predict it will involve something about C2DEs.
If Kellner's pre EU referendum polling had been right there would have been no Brexit as Remain would have won
You haven’t read his article, have you?
If you really are so stupid to think trying to scrape a Remain win on a second EU referendum and then doing nothing about free movement or concerns over deeper EU integration which caused the Leave result in the first place will solve anything you are beyond help, while such a result would see UKIP revive quicker than Lazarus
Okay, you haven’t grasped Kellner’s piece. Read it again.
I have read it again and it just reaffirms Kellner's now blatant pro Remain leanings. Who is Kellner's wife? Baroness Ashton, the former EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs.
One would have hoped after his firm called the referendum wrong in its final poll he would have learnt a little humility but no, he is already producing polls seeking to reverse Brexit before we have even left the EU and given the first referendum result even a modicum of respect
Just to cheer all the PBtories , reports are that the membership of the Labour Party now stands at 850, 000, while the dead give more money to the tories than the living. Please keep attacking Corbyn, you know it makes sense.....
Being seen as favouring Muslims over Jews isn't going to be a game changing vote loser for Corbyn any more than being seen to be anti immigrant was for Leave. The only people horrified are those who want him out anyway. His supporters will frame it as him sticking up for the little guy.
"One mans freedom fighter is another's terrorist..."
To be PM of the UK you have to empathise with everyone. Corbyn simply does not
I don't think that first sentence stands up to be honest.
So which British citizens does TM not stand up for
The ones she labelled citizens of nowhere.
So tax avoiders then?
She is a Prime Minister for prejudiced provincials. She offers nothing to anyone who lives and works inside the M25 or other urban areas,
Not true. But your own prejudice won’t let you understand that
Thinking that only tax avoiders would consider themselves citizens of the world is a prime example of lack of empathy.
Others would be the dementia tax, go home vans, not bothering to meet Grenfell survivors
As always the words around the phrase matter:
“Too many people in positions of power behave as if they have more in common with international elites than with the people down the road, the people they employ, the people they pass in the street. But if you believe you’re a citizen of the world you’re a citizen of nowhere. You don’t even understand what the word ‘citizenship’ means”
It’s quite clear that she is saying people need to contribute and engage with their community and society
Absolutely. And my point is that she did that in a way that anybody with an ounce of empathy for metropolitans would have known would get misinterpreted when, inevitably, it was reported out of context. Again, I'm not claiming, as Alistair does, that she was expressing an anti-Remainer sentiment. I'm saying the fact that she didn't realise how this would be wrongly interpreted is evidence of a lack of empathy.
On that narrow point it’s a fair argument. This good in smaller groups but doesn’t always appreciate how the mischievous may misrepresent her
Being seen as favouring Muslims over Jews isn't going to be a game changing vote loser for Corbyn any more than being seen to be anti immigrant was for Leave. The only people horrified are those who want him out anyway. His supporters will frame it as him sticking up for the little guy.
"One mans freedom fighter is another's terrorist..."
To be PM of the UK you have to empathise with everyone. Corbyn simply does not
I don't think that first sentence stands up to be honest.
So which British citizens does TM not stand up for
The ones she labelled citizens of nowhere.
So tax avoiders then?
She is a Prime Minister for prejudiced provincials. She offers nothing to anyone who lives and works inside the M25 or other urban areas,
Not true. But your own prejudice won’t let you understand that
Thinking that only tax avoiders would consider themselves citizens of the world is a prime example of lack of empathy.
Others would be the dementia tax, go home vans, not bothering to meet Grenfell survivors
As always the words around the phrase matter:
“Too many people in positions of power behave as if they have more in common with international elites than with the people down the road, the people they employ, the people they pass in the street. But if you believe you’re a citizen of the world you’re a citizen of nowhere. You don’t even understand what the word ‘citizenship’ means”
It’s quite clear that she is saying people need to contribute and engage with their community and society
Absolutely. And my point is that she did that in a way that anybody with an ounce of empathy for metropolitans would have known would get misinterpreted when, inevitably, it was reported out of context. Again, I'm not claiming, as Alistair does, that she was expressing an anti-Remainer sentiment. I'm saying the fact that she didn't realise how this would be wrongly interpreted is evidence of a lack of empathy.
Hmm. I’d go much further than that. It’s not possible to take that sentence “if you believe you are a citizen of the world...” out of context. It’s crystal clear that she believes those who are internationalist in their outlook are citizens of nowhere. It’s clear because she said it. The padding around it is little more than duck and cover.
For those that like opinion polls, the gigantic YouGov survey in tonight’s Standard might hold some interest. I am looking forward to HYUFD’s rebuttal of Peter Kellner, and predict it will involve something about C2DEs.
If Kellner's pre EU referendum polling had been right there would have been no Brexit as Remain would have won
You haven’t read his article, have you?
If you really are so stupid to think trying to scrape a Remain win on a second EU referendum and then doing nothing about free movement or concerns over deeper EU integration which caused the Leave result in the first place will solve anything you are beyond help, while such a result would see UKIP revive quicker than Lazarus
Okay, you haven’t grasped Kellner’s piece. Read it again.
I have read it again and it just reaffirms Kellner's now blatant pro Remain leanings. Who is Kellner's wife? Baroness Ashton, the former EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs.
One would have hoped after his firm called the referendum wrong in its final poll he would have learnt a little humility but no, he is already producing polls seeking to reverse Brexit before we have even left the EU and given the first referendum result even a modicum of respect
So because Kellner is married to Ashton he is deliberately misinterpreting or falsifying data? Even by your standards that is a nutty insinuation.
Just to cheer all the PBtories , reports are that the membership of the Labour Party now stands at 850, 000, while the dead give more money to the tories than the living. Please keep attacking Corbyn, you know it makes sense.....
Err - it's labour supporters and journalists attacking Corbyn. My twitter feed is full of well known labour supporters going for him, not one conservative
"You have helped to wreck the country because you decided that it was more important to leave the EU than oppose xenophobic lies."
There's no actual evidence that Brexit will wreck the country, and you're comparing a one-off thing with something that's ever-present. If someone takes a day off opposing xenophobic lies to leave the EU then it hardly makes them a supporter of such things.
People really did wrestle with the difficult decision, people really did have to balance what would be seen in a bad light by the rest of the world with what they thought might be gained. I really enjoy reading your thoughts about the whole process, but when you find yourself concluding that people that disagree with you are on some sort of evil rampage then perhaps it's time to take a step back.
I voted to leave the EU - it took me ages to decide. I eventually decided that the key factor was long-term prosperity of the UK. Right or wrong I concluded that in the long term being outside of the EU was the better option. My choice of vote has nothing to do with your stereotype. Every voter in that referendum has their own story. There may be people out there that actually voted opposite to their intentions. This simply is democracy.
Also, xenophobia is a fear, rather than any action - Can you really object to people getting uncomfortable (and fearful) when their surroundings change. Xenophobia is clearly not a desirable thing, but there's no sin in it. No malice either.
For those that like opinion polls, the gigantic YouGov survey in tonight’s Standard might hold some interest. I am looking forward to HYUFD’s rebuttal of Peter Kellner, and predict it will involve something about C2DEs.
If Kellner's pre EU referendum polling had been right there would have been no Brexit as Remain would have won
You haven’t read his article, have you?
If you really are so stupid to think trying to scrape a Remain win on a second EU referendum and then doing nothing about free movement or concerns over deeper EU integration which caused the Leave result in the first place will solve anything you are beyond help, while such a result would see UKIP revive quicker than Lazarus
Okay, you haven’t grasped Kellner’s piece. Read it again.
I have read it again and it just reaffirms Kellner's now blatant pro Remain leanings. Who is Kellner's wife? Baroness Ashton, the former EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs.
One would have hoped after his firm called the referendum wrong in its final poll he would have learnt a little humility but no, he is already producing polls seeking to reverse Brexit before we have even left the EU and given the first referendum result even a modicum of respect
Kellner called it correctly in YouGovs last 3 online polls, and this one was online too.
For those that like opinion polls, the gigantic YouGov survey in tonight’s Standard might hold some interest. I am looking forward to HYUFD’s rebuttal of Peter Kellner, and predict it will involve something about C2DEs.
If Kellner's pre EU referendum polling had been right there would have been no Brexit as Remain would have won
You haven’t read his article, have you?
If you really are so stupid to think trying to scrape a Remain win on a second EU referendum and then doing nothing about free movement or concerns over deeper EU integration which caused the Leave result in the first place will solve anything you are beyond help, while such a result would see UKIP revive quicker than Lazarus
Okay, you haven’t grasped Kellner’s piece. Read it again.
I have read it again and it just reaffirms Kellner's now blatant pro Remain leanings. Who is Kellner's wife? Baroness Ashton, the former EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs.
One would have hoped after his firm called the referendum wrong in its final poll he would have learnt a little humility but no, he is already producing polls seeking to reverse Brexit before we have even left the EU and given the first referendum result even a modicum of respect
So because Kellner is married to Ashton he is deliberately misinterpreting or falsifying data? Even by your standards that is a nutty insinuation.
His poll result today was virtually identical to the final wrong EU referendum poll his firm produced in 2016 when silent Leavers and undecideds won the day for Leave against the odds.
Yet he now has the audacity to say his new poll shows a big mandate against Brexit before the biggest post War vote in British history has even been implemented. It is outrageous commentary frankly
For those that like opinion polls, the gigantic YouGov survey in tonight’s Standard might hold some interest. I am looking forward to HYUFD’s rebuttal of Peter Kellner, and predict it will involve something about C2DEs.
If Kellner's pre EU referendum polling had been right there would have been no Brexit as Remain would have won
You haven’t read his article, have you?
If you really are so stupid to think trying to scrape a Remain win on a second EU referendum and then doing nothing about free movement or concerns over deeper EU integration which caused the Leave result in the first place will solve anything you are beyond help, while such a result would see UKIP revive quicker than Lazarus
Okay, you haven’t grasped Kellner’s piece. Read it again.
I have read it again and it just reaffirms Kellner's now blatant pro Remain leanings. Who is Kellner's wife? Baroness Ashton, the former EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs.
One would have hoped after his firm called the referendum wrong in its final poll he would have learnt a little humility but no, he is already producing polls seeking to reverse Brexit before we have even left the EU and given the first referendum result even a modicum of respect
So because Kellner is married to Ashton he is deliberately misinterpreting or falsifying data? Even by your standards that is a nutty insinuation.
As for Alec Salmond, as many may have guessed I hold no brief for him, but, as long term watcher, I know, as do many in Scotland, of his many foibles and failings, some of which are very legally dubious. A lot of which are known, many are suspected, but, he is known and respected for his attachment to his wife, Moira. That he has been accused of sexual misconduct to two female civil servants in the Scottish Office smells more of internal warfare within the SNP, making sure he doesn't return for a third time to save the party.
Just to cheer all the PBtories , reports are that the membership of the Labour Party now stands at 850, 000, while the dead give more money to the tories than the living. Please keep attacking Corbyn, you know it makes sense.....
To be fair I would rather have Corbyn as PM now than a diehard Remainer, at least he gives a bit of respect to democracy
As for Alec Salmond, as many may have guessed I hold no brief for him, but, as long term watcher, I know, as do many in Scotland, of his many foibles and failings, some of which are very legally dubious. A lot of which are known, many are suspected, but, he is known and respected for his attachment to his wife, Moira. That he has been accused of sexual misconduct to two female civil servants in the Scottish Office smells more of internal warfare within the SNP, making sure he doesn't return for a third time to save the party.
Nicola is very upset about this matter and I would suggest it is prudent to wait till the truth emerges, as it will in time
Just to cheer all the PBtories , reports are that the membership of the Labour Party now stands at 850, 000, while the dead give more money to the tories than the living. Please keep attacking Corbyn, you know it makes sense.....
Err - it's labour supporters and journalists attacking Corbyn. My twitter feed is full of well known labour supporters going for him, not one conservative
No need to get involved as labour implodes
It's not only Labour people involved, but there are plenty of them, but in any case I don't see why one side would stop attacking the other if they think the attacks are valid (and will work on enough of the electorate) even if it also seems to be firing up the attacked person's supporters.
The Labour membership is hugely impressive, and that it was not, for instance, a one year surge.
For those that like opinion polls, the gigantic YouGov survey in tonight’s Standard might hold some interest. I am looking forward to HYUFD’s rebuttal of Peter Kellner, and predict it will involve something about C2DEs.
If Kellner's pre EU referendum polling had been right there would have been no Brexit as Remain would have won
You haven’t read his article, have you?
If you really are so stupid to think trying to scrape a Remain win on a second EU referendum and then doing nothing about free movement or concerns over deeper EU integration which caused the Leave result in the first place will solve anything you are beyond help, while such a result would see UKIP revive quicker than Lazarus
Okay, you haven’t grasped Kellner’s piece. Read it again.
I have read it again and it just reaffirms Kellner's now blatant pro Remain leanings. Who is Kellner's wife? Baroness Ashton, the former EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs.
One would have hoped after his firm called the referendum wrong in its final poll he would have learnt a little humility but no, he is already producing polls seeking to reverse Brexit before we have even left the EU and given the first referendum result even a modicum of respect
So because Kellner is married to Ashton he is deliberately misinterpreting or falsifying data? Even by your standards that is a nutty insinuation.
His poll result today was virtually identical to the final EU referendum poll his firm produced in 2016 when silent Leavers and undecideds won the day for Leave against the odds.
Yet he now has the audacity to say how new poll shows a big mandate against Brexit before the biggest post War vote in British history has bern implemented. It is outrageous commentary frankly
You seem a bit over the top over this poll and it's reporting. I do not agree with you on this
For those that like opinion polls, the gigantic YouGov survey in tonight’s Standard might hold some interest. I am looking forward to HYUFD’s rebuttal of Peter Kellner, and predict it will involve something about C2DEs.
If Kellner's pre EU referendum polling had been right there would have been no Brexit as Remain would have won
You haven’t read his article, have you?
If you really are so stupid to think trying to scrape a Remain win on a second EU referendum and then doing nothing about free movement or concerns over deeper EU integration which caused the Leave result in the first place will solve anything you are beyond help, while such a result would see UKIP revive quicker than Lazarus
Okay, you haven’t grasped Kellner’s piece. Read it again.
I have read it again and it just reaffirms Kellner's now blatant pro Remain leanings. Who is Kellner's wife? Baroness Ashton, the former EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs.
One would have hoped after his firm called the referendum wrong in its final poll he would have learnt a little humility but no, he is already producing polls seeking to reverse Brexit before we have even left the EU and given the first referendum result even a modicum of respect
So because Kellner is married to Ashton he is deliberately misinterpreting or falsifying data? Even by your standards that is a nutty insinuation.
His poll result today was virtually identical to the final wrong EU referendum poll his firm produced in 2016 when silent Leavers and undecideds won the day for Leave against the odds.
Yet he now has the audacity to say his new poll shows a big mandate against Brexit before the biggest post War vote in British history has even been implemented. It is outrageous commentary frankly
Are you sure you have read it? If so, can you point me to the passage where he says there is a big mandate against Brexit?
@justin124 yes, I meant Prentice. You referred to Alan Browne (I think) - yes he did join the Conservatives eventually but only after quite a long spell as an independent and being deselected by his local party.
Re Dawkins, @Anazina is correct, he does criticise Muslims/Islam, but not very often. This is probably however not because he is frit. He says they are of less interest to him because he knows less about them than he does about Christians (in which incidentally he is completely wrong, but that's scarcely unusual for a man whose repeated blunders, bullying and intellectual incoherence earned him the nickname among actual scholars of the All-Mighty Dawk). However, he did memorably condemn an atheist women for complaining about being sexually harassed in a lift, on the basis that FGM in the Muslim world was a more serious problem to deal with.
I saw a very strange and disturbing sight today - a full train at Llandrindod Wells at midday. Admittedly it was a one-car 153 but it still shook me.
Did you go from Shrewsbury towards Llanelli, or Llanelli towards Shrewsbury?
For those that like opinion polls, the gigantic YouGov survey in tonight’s Standard might hold some interest. I am looking forward to HYUFD’s rebuttal of Peter Kellner, and predict it will involve something about C2DEs.
If Kellner's pre EU referendum polling had been right there would have been no Brexit as Remain would have won
You haven’t read his article, have you?
If you really are so stupid to think trying to scrape a Remain win on a second EU referendum and then doing nothing about free movement or concerns over deeper EU integration which caused the Leave result in the first place will solve anything you are beyond help, while such a result would see UKIP revive quicker than Lazarus
Okay, you haven’t grasped Kellner’s piece. Read it again.
I have read it again and it just reaffirms Kellner's now blatant pro Remain leanings. Who is Kellner's wife? Baroness Ashton, the former EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs.
One would have hoped after his firm called the referendum wrong in its final poll he would have learnt a little humility but no, he is already producing polls seeking to reverse Brexit before we have even left the EU and given the first referendum result even a modicum of respect
So because Kellner is married to Ashton he is deliberately misinterpreting or falsifying data? Even by your standards that is a nutty insinuation.
His poll result today was virtually identical to the final wrong EU referendum poll his firm produced in 2016 when silent Leavers and undecideds won the day for Leave against the odds.
Yet he now has the audacity to say his new poll shows a big mandate against Brexit before the biggest post War vote in British history has even been implemented. It is outrageous commentary frankly
His poll even shows that the Tory vote is more pro-Remain than it was in 2017. How dare he go around asking ordinary, decent people such impertinent questions!
Just to cheer all the PBtories , reports are that the membership of the Labour Party now stands at 850, 000, while the dead give more money to the tories than the living. Please keep attacking Corbyn, you know it makes sense.....
To be fair I would rather have Corbyn as PM now than a diehard Remainer, at least he gives a bit of respect to democracy
The campaign for Brexit was won on anti immigrant sentiment. The campaign against Corbyn is being run using accusations of anti Jewish sentiment. The anti immigrant stuff would appear in pro Brexit papers, it was used to campaign for it. The anti Jewish stuff in regards to Corbyn is wrote by anti Corbyn papers/journalists. It is used to campaign against Corbyn.
The charge of hypocrisy can be correctly made to Brexit supporters who are up in arms about Corbyn but not the other way around. It is those against Corbyn who bring up Corbyn and anti-Jewish sentiment, it is was a vote winner for him they wouldn't do it, it is those who were in favour of Brexit who would bring up anti immigration stuff and push it because it was a vote winner for them.
The recent storm about Boris wasn't because 15 years ago he made a negative reference to burka's or because he attended a conference with someone who had, the storm was because he decided to write about them in a national newspaper today (or it was today a couple of weeks back) he wanted this to be publicly discussed, this wasn't brought to attention by his opponents. There weren't barely attended or publicised meetings were Brexiteers discussed the possibilities of reducing immigration and their opponents put it in national newspapers to accuse them of racism. The campaign was front and centre, deliberately so.
I think that the antisemitic stench that's come out of LAB under Corbyn's leader is appalling. My parliamentary seat flips from LAB>CON>LAB and under the new boundaries would have a notional GE17 result of just a NINE vote margin. I've tactically voted Labour for the past two general elections. Next time, be assured my vote will not go to the Jew haters.
Which is why I think it is the angle Corbyn's opponents have chosen, early attempts at calling him a misogynist and a communist fell flat this is one where they have had far more joy.
You seem to imply that Corbyn's opponents have no legitimate grievances or concerns, and are just focusing on whatever attack line they think works. Why do you think they are doing that? The idea they don't want a Labour government, or even a more left leaning government, doesn't hold up to scrutiny since most of them are still, implicitly at the least, accepting they want him to the PM even if they are mad at him, so why are they so intent on attacking him?
For those that like opinion polls, the gigantic YouGov survey in tonight’s Standard might hold some interest. I am looking forward to HYUFD’s rebuttal of Peter Kellner, and predict it will involve something about C2DEs.
If Kellner's pre EU referendum polling had been right there would have been no Brexit as Remain would have won
You haven’t read his article, have you?
If you really are so stupid to think trying to scrape a Remain win on a second EU referendum and then doing nothing about free movement or concerns over deeper EU integration which caused the Leave result in the first place will solve anything you are beyond help, while such a result would see UKIP revive quicker than Lazarus
Okay, you haven’t grasped Kellner’s piece. Read it again.
I have read it again and it just reaffirms Kellner's now blatant pro Remain leanings. Who is Kellner's wife? Baroness Ashton, the former EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs.
One would have hoped after his firm called the referendum wrong in its final poll he would have learnt a little humility but no, he is already producing polls seeking to reverse Brexit before we have even left the EU and given the first referendum result even a modicum of respect
Kellner called it correctly in YouGovs last 3 online polls, and this one was online too.
As said downthread, Kellner is merely analysing his own data, which - interestingly - benchmarks against actual votes at the referendum. HYUFD - willfully or otherwise - has repeatedly failed to grasp this, and has instead chosen to attack Kellner as a shill.
@justin124 yes, I meant Prentice. You referred to Alan Browne (I think) - yes he did join the Conservatives eventually but only after quite a long spell as an independent and being deselected by his local party.
Re Dawkins, @Anazina is correct, he does criticise Muslims/Islam, but not very often. This is probably however not because he is frit. He says they are of less interest to him because he knows less about them than he does about Christians (in which incidentally he is completely wrong, but that's scarcely unusual for a man whose repeated blunders, bullying and intellectual incoherence earned him the nickname among actual scholars of the All-Mighty Dawk). However, he did memorably condemn an atheist women for complaining about being sexually harassed in a lift, on the basis that FGM in the Muslim world was a more serious problem to deal with.
I saw a very strange and disturbing sight today - a full train at Llandrindod Wells at midday. Admittedly it was a one-car 153 but it still shook me.
Did you go from Shrewsbury towards Llanelli, or Llanelli towards Shrewsbury?
Started at Craven Arms, lunch at Llanelli, caught the 14.53 back to Craven Arms.
For those that like opinion polls, the gigantic YouGov survey in tonight’s Standard might hold some interest. I am looking forward to HYUFD’s rebuttal of Peter Kellner, and predict it will involve something about C2DEs.
If Kellner's pre EU referendum polling had been right there would have been no Brexit as Remain would have won
You haven’t read his article, have you?
If you really are so stupid to think trying to scrape a Remain win on a second EU referendum and then doing nothing about free movement or concerns over deeper EU integration which caused the Leave result in the first place will solve anything you are beyond help, while such a result would see UKIP revive quicker than Lazarus
Okay, you haven’t grasped Kellner’s piece. Read it again.
I have read it again and it just reaffirms Kellner's now blatant pro Remain leanings. Who is Kellner's wife? Baroness Ashton, the former EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs.
One would have hoped after his firm called the referendum wrong in its final poll he would have learnt a little humility but no, he is already producing polls seeking to reverse Brexit before we have even left the EU and given the first referendum result even a modicum of respect
So because Kellner is married to Ashton he is deliberately misinterpreting or falsifying data? Even by your standards that is a nutty insinuation.
His poll result today was virtually identical to the final wrong EU referendum poll his firm produced in 2016 when silent Leavers and undecideds won the day for Leave against the odds.
Yet he now has the audacity to say his new poll shows a big mandate against Brexit before the biggest post War vote in British history has even been implemented. It is outrageous commentary frankly
His poll even shows that the Tory vote is more pro-Remain than it was in 2017. How dare he go around asking ordinary, decent people such impertinent questions!
2017 yes, only because UKIP is up to 7% or so post Chequers Deal.
Compared to 2016 the Tory vote is still significantly more pro Brexit
Just to cheer all the PBtories , reports are that the membership of the Labour Party now stands at 850, 000, while the dead give more money to the tories than the living. Please keep attacking Corbyn, you know it makes sense.....
To be fair I would rather have Corbyn as PM now than a diehard Remainer, at least he gives a bit of respect to democracy
You really have flipped tonight
No I mean it.
Corbyn will only be for a term or two. If diehard Remainers manage to overturn the referendum result they will not stop there but see it as a mandate to sign up the UK ultimately to the Eurozone and a Federal EU with no further democratic mandate required.
It would be the end of the UK in effect as an independent country, we would just become a state of the EU
Just to cheer all the PBtories , reports are that the membership of the Labour Party now stands at 850, 000, while the dead give more money to the tories than the living. Please keep attacking Corbyn, you know it makes sense.....
Err - it's labour supporters and journalists attacking Corbyn. My twitter feed is full of well known labour supporters going for him, not one conservative
No need to get involved as labour implodes
It's not only Labour people involved, but there are plenty of them, but in any case I don't see why one side would stop attacking the other if they think the attacks are valid (and will work on enough of the electorate) even if it also seems to be firing up the attacked person's supporters.
The Labour membership is hugely impressive, and that it was not, for instance, a one year surge.
"The Labour membership is hugely impressive" - indeed. All wallowing in a pool of self-indulgency and conspiracy theories. At some point they will realise (or perhaps not) that beyond the boundaries of the pool in which they swim, lies another pool...the pool where the electorate live.
I’ve heard enough times from the far right/Tommy Robinson that I can’t be British because my loyalties lie towards Mecca.
Labour must be so proud.
Next Corbyn’s team will be using the line that the absolute boy cannot be a racist because Judaism/Zionism isn’t a race.
It’s the same line the far right make when they say Islam isn’t a race.
When I was much younger I used to hear from some people that Catholics couldn’t be properly British because they were somehow “foreign” and owed their loyalty to the Pope. I had’t heard that for a while until quite recently.
It is scapegoating of unpopular minorities. But according to @NickPalmer we should not be worried because Labour represents the cultural zeitgeist and not the nasty racism of previous decades. He was talking garbage, of course.
Isn't that what Eagles says about JRM?
Its what JRM says about JRM:
...as a Catholic father-of-six he has consistently opposed gay marriage. In 2013, he said that on same sex partnerships, “I take my whip from the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church rather than the [Conservative] Whip’s Office.”
That does not make him foreign or unBritish. It simply means that on matters of Catholic doctrine he follows Catholic doctrine. There is a subtle but important difference between that and suggesting that Catholics owe their primary loyalty to a foriegn state or power -and are therefore unBritish.
As for Alec Salmond, as many may have guessed I hold no brief for him, but, as long term watcher, I know, as do many in Scotland, of his many foibles and failings, some of which are very legally dubious. A lot of which are known, many are suspected, but, he is known and respected for his attachment to his wife, Moira. That he has been accused of sexual misconduct to two female civil servants in the Scottish Office smells more of internal warfare within the SNP, making sure he doesn't return for a third time to save the party.
At some point it’s probably worth pointing out that, rather like Macron, his wife is old enough to be his mother; she’s 80 and he’s 62. I can’t imagine he’s been getting it three times a week for the last decade or two, a situation with which some men find very difficult to cope.
Corbyn, Brexit and Trump: I wonder which will be reversed first. It's looking like Corbyn at present.
Interesting analysis - as crazy as it seems there would seem to be easier paths to reverse the latter two - the Labour Party’s bonkers rulebook makes it nigh-on impossible to unseat the leader!
Just to cheer all the PBtories , reports are that the membership of the Labour Party now stands at 850, 000, while the dead give more money to the tories than the living. Please keep attacking Corbyn, you know it makes sense.....
To be fair I would rather have Corbyn as PM now than a diehard Remainer, at least he gives a bit of respect to democracy
You really have flipped tonight
No I mean it.
Corbyn will only be for a term or two. If diehard Remainers manage to overturn the referendum result they will not stop there but see it as a mandate to sign up the UK ultimately to the Eurozone and a Federal EU with no further democratic mandate required.
It would be the end of the UK in effect as an independent country, we would just become a state of the EU
You have lost it tonight. Grab a horlicks and calm down.
Nothing is worse than suggested Corbyn will be a one or even two term PM
As for Alec Salmond, as many may have guessed I hold no brief for him, but, as long term watcher, I know, as do many in Scotland, of his many foibles and failings, some of which are very legally dubious. A lot of which are known, many are suspected, but, he is known and respected for his attachment to his wife, Moira. That he has been accused of sexual misconduct to two female civil servants in the Scottish Office smells more of internal warfare within the SNP, making sure he doesn't return for a third time to save the party.
At some point it’s probably worth pointing out that, rather like Macron, his wife is old enough to be his mother; she’s 80 and he’s 62. I can’t imagine he’s been getting it three times a week for the last decade or two, a situation with which some men find very difficult to cope.
Given some rumours on the web and from a certain thriller writer of this parish Macron has had some other companions though not necessarily of the fairer sex
Just to cheer all the PBtories , reports are that the membership of the Labour Party now stands at 850, 000, while the dead give more money to the tories than the living. Please keep attacking Corbyn, you know it makes sense.....
To be fair I would rather have Corbyn as PM now than a diehard Remainer, at least he gives a bit of respect to democracy
You really have flipped tonight
No I mean it.
Corbyn will only be for a term or two. If diehard Remainers manage to overturn the referendum result they will not stop there but see it as a mandate to sign up the UK ultimately to the Eurozone and a Federal EU with no further democratic mandate required.
It would be the end of the UK in effect as an independent country, we would just become a state of the EU
You have lost it tonight. Grab a horlicks and calm down.
Nothing is worse than suggested Corbyn will be a one or even two term PM
Permanently being signed up to an EU Superstate is worse for me I am afraid, Mogg has said preserving Brexit is more important than stopping Corbyn
Just to cheer all the PBtories , reports are that the membership of the Labour Party now stands at 850, 000, while the dead give more money to the tories than the living. Please keep attacking Corbyn, you know it makes sense.....
To be fair I would rather have Corbyn as PM now than a diehard Remainer, at least he gives a bit of respect to democracy
You really have flipped tonight
No I mean it.
Corbyn will only be for a term or two. If diehard Remainers manage to overturn the referendum result they will not stop there but see it as a mandate to sign up the UK ultimately to the Eurozone and a Federal EU with no further democratic mandate required.
It would be the end of the UK in effect as an independent country, we would just become a state of the EU
You have lost it tonight. Grab a horlicks and calm down.
Nothing is worse than suggested Corbyn will be a one or even two term PM
Permanently being signed up to an EU Superstate is worse for me I am afraid, Mogg has said preserving Brexit is more important than stopping Corbyn
“Too many people in positions of power behave as if they have more in common with international elites than with the people down the road, the people they employ, the people they pass in the street. But if you believe you’re a citizen of the world you’re a citizen of nowhere. You don’t even understand what the word ‘citizenship’ means”
It’s quite clear that she is saying people need to contribute and engage with their community and society
Absolutely. And my point is that she did that in a way that anybody with an ounce of empathy for metropolitans would have known would get misinterpreted when, inevitably, it was reported out of context. Again, I'm not claiming, as Alistair does, that she was expressing an anti-Remainer sentiment. I'm saying the fact that she didn't realise how this would be wrongly interpreted is evidence of a lack of empathy.
Hmm. I’d go much further than that. It’s not possible to take that sentence “if you believe you are a citizen of the world...” out of context. It’s crystal clear that she believes those who are internationalist in their outlook are citizens of nowhere. It’s clear because she said it. The padding around it is little more than duck and cover.
No - she is clearly refering to people who "behave as if they have more in common with international elites than with the people down the street"
That's not the same as internationalist in outlook - it's divorcing yourself from the local community. Of course it's a case of n=1, but our family is extremely global in outlook, but are always careful to remain strongly roots and engaged with our local communities in the West Country and in Farringdon Without.
Just to cheer all the PBtories , reports are that the membership of the Labour Party now stands at 850, 000, while the dead give more money to the tories than the living. Please keep attacking Corbyn, you know it makes sense.....
To be fair I would rather have Corbyn as PM now than a diehard Remainer, at least he gives a bit of respect to democracy
You really have flipped tonight
No I mean it.
Corbyn will only be for a term or two. If diehard Remainers manage to overturn the referendum result they will not stop there but see it as a mandate to sign up the UK ultimately to the Eurozone and a Federal EU with no further democratic mandate required.
It would be the end of the UK in effect as an independent country, we would just become a state of the EU
You have lost it tonight. Grab a horlicks and calm down.
Nothing is worse than suggested Corbyn will be a one or even two term PM
Permanently being signed up to an EU Superstate is worse for me I am afraid, Mogg has said preserving Brexit is more important than stopping Corbyn
It is not going to happen. TM will do a deal
I hope so but clearly some diehard Remainers will keep pushing to reverse Brexit regardless and they must be resisted
Comments
Poor old Alex and Nicola in a mess but nothing to do with being in favour of our Union
We will never know.
But I think you’re right: I’m going to leave it for now, and save it for another day.
He does contribute enormously and I do respect him even though I think he pushes xenophobia too far
If the complainants were male then it'd be difficult for Mr Salmond in that there might be aspects of his life that he'd chosen to keep secret which might then become public, but I suspect that he has no reason to fear any such exposure.
The charge of hypocrisy can be correctly made to Brexit supporters who are up in arms about Corbyn but not the other way around. It is those against Corbyn who bring up Corbyn and anti-Jewish sentiment, it is was a vote winner for him they wouldn't do it, it is those who were in favour of Brexit who would bring up anti immigration stuff and push it because it was a vote winner for them.
The recent storm about Boris wasn't because 15 years ago he made a negative reference to burka's or because he attended a conference with someone who had, the storm was because he decided to write about them in a national newspaper today (or it was today a couple of weeks back) he wanted this to be publicly discussed, this wasn't brought to attention by his opponents. There weren't barely attended or publicised meetings were Brexiteers discussed the possibilities of reducing immigration and their opponents put it in national newspapers to accuse them of racism. The campaign was front and centre, deliberately so.
Edit: As for David Duke if we are to take him at his word he prefers May to Corbyn, not that facts matter when it comes to smearing Corbyn.....
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/corruption/john-mccain-also-sought-to-use-irs-to-engage-in-financially-ruinous-audits-of-opponents/
https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/1033084579849138181
It would rival the politician in the eighteenth century (apologies, forget his name) who said he couldn't have been involved in beating up a political opponent because he was banging said opponent's wife at the time.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6090955/Motorist-reveals-hes-hit-TWELVE-fines-traffic-camera-makes-100-000-week.html
Re Dawkins, @Anazina is correct, he does criticise Muslims/Islam, but not very often. This is probably however not because he is frit. He says they are of less interest to him because he knows less about them than he does about Christians (in which incidentally he is completely wrong, but that's scarcely unusual for a man whose repeated blunders, bullying and intellectual incoherence earned him the nickname among actual scholars of the All-Mighty Dawk). However, he did memorably condemn an atheist women for complaining about being sexually harassed in a lift, on the basis that FGM in the Muslim world was a more serious problem to deal with.
I saw a very strange and disturbing sight today - a full train at Llandrindod Wells at midday. Admittedly it was a one-car 153 but it still shook me.
Also even those who did vote on immigration, fair enough. There is nothing in itself morally wrong with wanting reduced (or different) immigration, I would make a morality argument for refugees but even that wouldn't necessarily be racist but perhaps selfish instead.
My comment refers to parts of the Brexit campaign and its leaders.
I think Boris probably does genuinely dislike the Burka and is happy to stir up anti Muslim sentiment to win votes.
Edit: Unrelated to the rest of my post but I'm sorry to hear about McCain, as Republicans go there aren't many (or perhaps any) I can think of that I have more respect for or would like as president over the others. What a life story as well. Hope he has a good an end as possible.
“Too many people in positions of power behave as if they have more in common with international elites than with the people down the road, the people they employ, the people they pass in the street. But if you believe you’re a citizen of the world you’re a citizen of nowhere. You don’t even understand what the word ‘citizenship’ means”
It’s quite clear that she is saying people need to contribute and engage with their community and society
To my mind the Jewdas story fairly definitively shows that he does separate out Jewish from pro-Israel, and furthermore that many of the people attacking him do not.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/24/corbyn-english-irony-video-reignites-antisemitism-row-labour
I think people disliked economic competition and a lack of control of the direction of their society. They may be wrong, but there are valid reasons to oppose uncontrolled immigration.
The Tory vote will obviously not split the same way as 2016 as over 50% of the 2015 UKIP vote voted Tory in 2017 and most of them would still vote Tory even despite the Chequers Deal, while some of the Tory diehard Remainers have gone to the LDs
I live in in ultra-marginal and my guess is that lots of LDs have tactically voted in general elections. How is Corbyn going to hang onto them? That's the electoral danger. There is a large party here and we've held the elected mayoralty for nine years. The Tory image is enhanced by Nadine being one of the Borough's MPs
One would have hoped after his firm called the referendum wrong in its final poll he would have learnt a little humility but no, he is already producing polls seeking to reverse Brexit before we have even left the EU and given the first referendum result even a modicum of respect
No need to get involved as labour implodes
You wrote;
"You have helped to wreck the country because you decided that it was more important to leave the EU than oppose xenophobic lies."
There's no actual evidence that Brexit will wreck the country, and you're comparing a one-off thing with something that's ever-present. If someone takes a day off opposing xenophobic lies to leave the EU then it hardly makes them a supporter of such things.
People really did wrestle with the difficult decision, people really did have to balance what would be seen in a bad light by the rest of the world with what they thought might be gained. I really enjoy reading your thoughts about the whole process, but when you find yourself concluding that people that disagree with you are on some sort of evil rampage then perhaps it's time to take a step back.
I voted to leave the EU - it took me ages to decide. I eventually decided that the key factor was long-term prosperity of the UK. Right or wrong I concluded that in the long term being outside of the EU was the better option. My choice of vote has nothing to do with your stereotype. Every voter in that referendum has their own story. There may be people out there that actually voted opposite to their intentions. This simply is democracy.
Also, xenophobia is a fear, rather than any action - Can you really object to people getting uncomfortable (and fearful) when their surroundings change. Xenophobia is clearly not a desirable thing, but there's no sin in it. No malice either.
Yet he now has the audacity to say his new poll shows a big mandate against Brexit before the biggest post War vote in British history has even been implemented. It is outrageous commentary frankly
The Labour membership is hugely impressive, and that it was not, for instance, a one year surge.
You seem to imply that Corbyn's opponents have no legitimate grievances or concerns, and are just focusing on whatever attack line they think works. Why do you think they are doing that? The idea they don't want a Labour government, or even a more left leaning government, doesn't hold up to scrutiny since most of them are still, implicitly at the least, accepting they want him to the PM even if they are mad at him, so why are they so intent on attacking him?
Compared to 2016 the Tory vote is still significantly more pro Brexit
Corbyn will only be for a term or two. If diehard Remainers manage to overturn the referendum result they will not stop there but see it as a mandate to sign up the UK ultimately to the Eurozone and a Federal EU with no further democratic mandate required.
It would be the end of the UK in effect as an independent country, we would just become a state of the EU
Nothing is worse than suggested Corbyn will be a one or even two term PM
That's not the same as internationalist in outlook - it's divorcing yourself from the local community. Of course it's a case of n=1, but our family is extremely global in outlook, but are always careful to remain strongly roots and engaged with our local communities in the West Country and in Farringdon Without.