Thousands of people who invested in a high-risk bond scheme marketed as a "Fixed Rate ISA" fear they have lost everything after the company collapsed."
Already discussed - the type of product being offered 'mini bonds' isn't regulated by the FCA and I bet many people bought them as they thought they were ISA eligible -The selling of ISAs of course are regulated.
Absolutely staggering that the FCA were warned about this in 2015 but did nothing for three years. Given that the scam was promoted with ads claiming FCA authorisation, that must be the biggest failure of consumer protection in the financial sector in decades, if not longer.
Which presumably gives those who have lost out a route to recoup their losses from the FCA (i.e. the taxpayer).
Thousands of people who invested in a high-risk bond scheme marketed as a "Fixed Rate ISA" fear they have lost everything after the company collapsed."
Already discussed - the type of product being offered 'mini bonds' isn't regulated by the FCA and I bet many people bought them as they thought they were ISA eligible -The selling of ISAs of course are regulated.
Absolutely staggering that the FCA were warned about this in 2015 but did nothing for three years. Given that the scam was promoted with ads claiming FCA authorisation, that must be the biggest failure of consumer protection in the financial sector in decades, if not longer.
Which presumably gives those who have lost out a route to recoup their losses from the FCA (i.e. the taxpayer).
In a fair world, it would. A few cancelled bonuses and sackings at the FCA also wouldn't go amiss.
Thousands of people who invested in a high-risk bond scheme marketed as a "Fixed Rate ISA" fear they have lost everything after the company collapsed."
Already discussed - the type of product being offered 'mini bonds' isn't regulated by the FCA and I bet many people bought them as they thought they were ISA eligible -The selling of ISAs of course are regulated.
Absolutely staggering that the FCA were warned about this in 2015 but did nothing for three years. Given that the scam was promoted with ads claiming FCA authorisation, that must be the biggest failure of consumer protection in the financial sector in decades, if not longer.
Which presumably gives those who have lost out a route to recoup their losses from the FCA (i.e. the taxpayer).
In a fair world, it would. A few cancelled bonuses and sackings at the FCA also wouldn't go amiss.
Indeed, although arguably those who took this product did so in the hope of beating the market. At what point should it be caveat emptor?
Indeed, although arguably those who took this product did so in the hope of beating the market. At what point should it be caveat emptor?
Whilst in general that would be a good argument, in this particular case the investors thought (presumably) that the scheme was pukka because it was 'authorised and regulated by the FCA'. Caveat Emptor shouldn't apply if you have a regulator who is supposed to do the basic due diligence work on behalf of the consumer (and for which the consumer pays). The regulator can't simply say 'oh well, nothing to do with us guv.'
Indeed, although arguably those who took this product did so in the hope of beating the market. At what point should it be caveat emptor?
Whilst in general that would be a good argument, in this particular case the investors thought (presumably) that the scheme was pukka because it was 'authorised and regulated by the FCA'. Caveat Emptor shouldn't apply if you have a regulator who is supposed to do the basic due diligence work for the consumer (and for which the consumer pays). The regulator can't simply say 'oh well, nothing to do with us guv.'
I don't see any pattern that needs explaining. I am not one of his supporters either. But my objection to his talking to Hezbollah is that it is self indulgent and unlikely to help. It's a rough neighbourhood and they've probably done some bad things, but you can say the same about most of the organisations around there. I'd say avoiding getting involved is the best policy.
But the huge amount of coverage this issue is being given is clearly politically motivated. I wouldn't use the word conspiracy simply because that implies it is being done covertly. This is pretty much out in the open.
I'm genuinely surprised you don't see a pattern. I look forward to you giving your political antagonists similar benefit of the doubt in the future!
So another question: if you are going to ignore all the above (and it was not a comprehensive list), what would he have to do or say to convince you that he is anti-Semitic? If you use the criteria you mentioned in your first post, that's a rather high bar!
On another point: even if you think he isn't anti-Semitic, this mess is not the result of his opponents. It's all down to him, and his inability to stop the mess within his party. He had an opportunity with the Chakrabati report a couple of years ago, but all he ever does is poor fuel on the fire. You might want to consider why that might be.
I don't know if he's antisemitic. I'm not a mind reader. Neither are you. I am pretty sure the Conservative councillor who referred to Jews as Yids that I knew in the seventies was anti-semitic. Though even he wasn't exactly Himmler as he was in favour of sending them all to Israel while rather mysteriously also thinking that a small dash of Jewish blood was somehow beneficial. But that is what people are like when you actually know them. We are often a mess of contradictions and confusion about the stuff we don't actually need to understand to get by in our daily lives. So I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt.
How do you explain Corbyn going to a passover celebration with a Jewish group who were obviously very pleased to see him?
Thousands of people who invested in a high-risk bond scheme marketed as a "Fixed Rate ISA" fear they have lost everything after the company collapsed."
Already discussed - the type of product being offered 'mini bonds' isn't regulated by the FCA and I bet many people bought them as they thought they were ISA eligible -The selling of ISAs of course are regulated.
Absolutely staggering that the FCA were warned about this in 2015 but did nothing for three years. Given that the scam was promoted with ads claiming FCA authorisation, that must be the biggest failure of consumer protection in the financial sector in decades, if not longer.
I know someone who has potentially lost a five figure sum in this, after I warned them not to put their money into it. Thankfully I have all the screenshots proving it as well. My words were "it looks extremely dodgy and I wouldn't invest my own money into this scheme". Oh well.
Thousands of people who invested in a high-risk bond scheme marketed as a "Fixed Rate ISA" fear they have lost everything after the company collapsed."
Why the fca allowed peer to peer and these alternative finance things to become isa eligible and so the badge of respectability that gave I'll never know. As an IFA it's simple if something is offering 8pct then it's v high risk and also v hard to assess.... So bargepole every time as otherwise its our neck and then the fscs underwriting these things.... No thank you.
I don't know if he's antisemitic. How do you explain Corbyn going to a passover celebration with a Jewish group who were obviously very pleased to see him?
Are you referring to the radical Jewish group Jewdas?
"Jeremy Corbyn has said he “learned a lot” at a Passover event hosted by a leftwing Jewish group highly critical of mainstream Jewish bodies, after he was rebuked by MPs for attending."
"Jewdas, the group which hosted Jeremy Corbyn at a Seder last night, is a left-wing and anti-Zionist organisation of British Jews. Representing what it describes as “radical voices for the alternative diaspora”, Jewdas has been fiercely critical of both the state of Israel and the mainstream British Jewish communal leadership. The group tweeted last December that Israel was “a steaming pile of sewage which needs to be disposed of”, and claimed last week’s protest against antisemitism was “the work of cynical manipulations by people whose express loyalty is to the Conservative Party and the right wing of the Labour Party”."
It wasn't exactly a tough gig for him, was it? Fellow political believers; fellow political travellers. It's not as it he went to an Haredi celebration. Note: I am not calling Jewdas 'bad' Jews: just that politically they have a great deal in common with Corbyn. He was on home turf; they could find a lot to agree on without getting onto religion.
Go back to my original list. Look at that mural. Just look at it. Does it ring warning bells in your mind? And why do you think Corbyn supported the artist? It's either an utter lack of knowledge of anti-Semitism, an agreement with anti-Semitism, or sheer, bloody incompetence. If the former, you would have thought he would have learnt about it by now given the political troubles it has caused him; if the latter, how many times do you use that excuse before it rings false?
So Corbyn a left wing politician hooks up with a left wing Jewish group. Isn't that sort of what you'd expect?
As to the mural, I wouldn't have twigged that it was anti-semitic if I hadn't been told it was. Would you have done? Now it is pointed out I can see it. But as gaffes go it is about on the same level as Amber Rudd's the other day. Does that make Rudd a racist? Hardly.
This whole anti-semitic thing has been used as a very effective stick to beat the Labour Party and Corbyn in particular. It is the latest in a long line of attack strategies that have been used. The IRA ones and the Communist ones fell flat. This one seems to resonate for some reason.
Thousands of people who invested in a high-risk bond scheme marketed as a "Fixed Rate ISA" fear they have lost everything after the company collapsed."
Already discussed - the type of product being offered 'mini bonds' isn't regulated by the FCA and I bet many people bought them as they thought they were ISA eligible -The selling of ISAs of course are regulated.
Absolutely staggering that the FCA were warned about this in 2015 but did nothing for three years. Given that the scam was promoted with ads claiming FCA authorisation, that must be the biggest failure of consumer protection in the financial sector in decades, if not longer.
Which presumably gives those who have lost out a route to recoup their losses from the FCA (i.e. the taxpayer).
They shouldn't count on it. The claims made about FCA authorisation were cleverly and carefully worded to give the impression that the bonds were regulated by the FCA, when they weren't. The misleading was being done by the perpetrators of the scheme not the FCA so it will be very difficult to make a claim against the FCA. It will be long and expensive and some of those who invested have lost all their savings.
Plus there were some dodgy comparison websites which put this firm at the top of their list and thereby attracted investors. Those websites are not regulated by the FCA.
However, the fact that the FCA did nothing about this despite being warned is very poor indeed on the part of the FCA. It's not enough to give warnings. They should have taken active steps to close the scam down.
"One Downing Street insider said the week ahead looked 'choppy'"
Well, no shit Sherlock.
They are certainly getting practice at being able to describe awful things in moderate language. Best hope there is not a hurricane incoming, which they would probably describe as inclement weather.
So Corbyn a left wing politician hooks up with a left wing Jewish group. Isn't that sort of what you'd expect?
As to the mural, I wouldn't have twigged that it was anti-semitic if I hadn't been told it was. Would you have done? Now it is pointed out I can see it. But as gaffes go it is about on the same level as Amber Rudd's the other day. Does that make Rudd a racist? Hardly.
This whole anti-semitic thing has been used as a very effective stick to beat the Labour Party and Corbyn in particular. It is the latest in a long line of attack strategies that have been used. The IRA ones and the Communist ones fell flat. This one seems to resonate for some reason.
I'd rather make my own mind up.
That mural was absolutely, obviously and unambiguously anti-semitic. It could have come straight out of 1930s Nazi propaganda. There is no way whatsoever that anyone of Corbyn's age and experience, who has the gall to claim that he has 'been fighting anti-semitism all his life', should not have recognised it as such. What the hell does 'fighting anti-semitism all his life' mean if he can't even recognise the most blatant examples of it?
The clear conclusion is that it didn't shock him because he agrees with it. There is no plausible way out of this: he clearly believes that 'the few' (bankers, capitalists, Americans, Tories, Jews) are parasites deliberately living off the honest work of 'the many' (a vaguer concept, the details of which don't interest him). It's the classic anti-semitism of the left, and of other populist demagogues.
So Corbyn a left wing politician hooks up with a left wing Jewish group. Isn't that sort of what you'd expect?
As to the mural, I wouldn't have twigged that it was anti-semitic if I hadn't been told it was. Would you have done? Now it is pointed out I can see it. But as gaffes go it is about on the same level as Amber Rudd's the other day. Does that make Rudd a racist? Hardly.
This whole anti-semitic thing has been used as a very effective stick to beat the Labour Party and Corbyn in particular. It is the latest in a long line of attack strategies that have been used. The IRA ones and the Communist ones fell flat. This one seems to resonate for some reason.
I'd rather make my own mind up.
That mural was absolutely, obviously and unambiguously anti-semitic. It could have come straight out of 1930s Nazi propaganda. There is no way whatsoever that anyone of Corbyn's age and experience, who has the gall to claim that he has 'been fighting anti-semitism all his life', should not have recognised it as such.
More tellingly, the attempt to suggest it was not blatantly obviously anti semitic rather overlooks that if that was a plausible explanation Corbyn and his team would have used it (though of course online supporters are apparently still pushing that). That they went for the excuse that he somehow decided to support it even though he didn't look at it, gives the game away that they know damn well the image was anti-semitic. People don't use an excuse like that unless it's the only one they have remaining, because it is to admit stupidity.
So we can either accept the explanation that he acted dumbly, or believe he supported it despite knowing what it was. I'll leave it to the individual to decide which they choose to believe on that front, but given the excuse he himself gave in expressing regret for his actions there, what we cannot plausibly do is act like it was not an obviously offensive image.
To do otherwise would be another example of his core supporters suggesting Corbyn is a liar.
So Corbyn a left wing politician hooks up with a left wing Jewish group. Isn't that sort of what you'd expect?
As to the mural, I wouldn't have twigged that it was anti-semitic if I hadn't been told it was. Would you have done? Now it is pointed out I can see it. But as gaffes go it is about on the same level as Amber Rudd's the other day. Does that make Rudd a racist? Hardly.
This whole anti-semitic thing has been used as a very effective stick to beat the Labour Party and Corbyn in particular. It is the latest in a long line of attack strategies that have been used. The IRA ones and the Communist ones fell flat. This one seems to resonate for some reason.
I'd rather make my own mind up.
That mural was absolutely, obviously and unambiguously anti-semitic. It could have come straight out of 1930s Nazi propaganda. There is no way whatsoever that anyone of Corbyn's age and experience, who has the gall to claim that he has 'been fighting anti-semitism all his life', should not have recognised it as such. What the hell does 'fighting anti-semitism all his life' mean if he can't even recognise the most blatant examples of it?
The clear conclusion is that it didn't shock him because he agrees with it. There is no plausible way out of this: he clearly believes that 'the few' (bankers, capitalists, Americans, Tories, Jews) are parasites deliberately living off the honest work of 'the many' (a vaguer concept, the details of which don't interest him). It's the classic anti-semitism of the left, and of other populist demagogues.
Agree. It is simply not possible for someone with any kind of education to see that mural and not think, “anti-Semitic”.
So May has to quit to save the deal, and also has to quit if the deal fails?
Yeah, I'm ok with that.
Hands up those who believe the deal will be passed if May quits.
No, me neither.
It's been suggested that might save the deal for 3 months. If it were true it would have happened already. The reasons for opposition go beyond May, either in seeking a different Brexit or preventing Brexit.
So Corbyn a left wing politician hooks up with a left wing Jewish group. Isn't that sort of what you'd expect?
As to the mural, I wouldn't have twigged that it was anti-semitic if I hadn't been told it was. Would you have done? Now it is pointed out I can see it. But as gaffes go it is about on the same level as Amber Rudd's the other day. Does that make Rudd a racist? Hardly.
This whole anti-semitic thing has been used as a very effective stick to beat the Labour Party and Corbyn in particular. It is the latest in a long line of attack strategies that have been used. The IRA ones and the Communist ones fell flat. This one seems to resonate for some reason.
I'd rather make my own mind up.
That mural was absolutely, obviously and unambiguously anti-semitic. It could have come straight out of 1930s Nazi propaganda. There is no way whatsoever that anyone of Corbyn's age and experience, who has the gall to claim that he has 'been fighting anti-semitism all his life', should not have recognised it as such. What the hell does 'fighting anti-semitism all his life' mean if he can't even recognise the most blatant examples of it?
The clear conclusion is that it didn't shock him because he agrees with it. There is no plausible way out of this: he clearly believes that 'the few' (bankers, capitalists, Americans, Tories, Jews) are parasites deliberately living off the honest work of 'the many' (a vaguer concept, the details of which don't interest him). It's the classic anti-semitism of the left, and of other populist demagogues.
Agree. It is simply not possible for someone with any kind of education to see that mural and not think, “anti-Semitic”.
I don't see any pattern that needs explaining. I am not one of his supporters either. But my objection to his talking to Hezbollah is that it is self indulgent and unlikely to help. It's a rough neighbourhood and they've probably done some bad things, but you can say the same about most of the organisations around there. I'd say avoiding getting involved is the best policy.
But the huge amount of coverage this issue is being given is clearly politically motivated. I wouldn't use the word conspiracy simply because that implies it is being done covertly. This is pretty much out in the open.
I'm genuinely surprised you don't see a pattern. I look forward to you giving your political antagonists similar benefit of the doubt in the future!
So another question: if you are going to ignore all the above (and it was not a comprehensive list), what would he have to do or say to convince you that he is anti-Semitic? If you use the criteria you mentioned in your first post, that's a rather high bar!
On another point: even if you think he isn't anti-Semitic, this mess is not the result of his opponents. It's all down to him, and his inability to stop the mess within his party. He had an opportunity with the Chakrabati report a couple of years ago, but all he ever does is poor fuel on the fire. You might want to consider why that might be.
I don't know if he's antisemitic. I'm not a mind reader. Neither are you. I am pretty sure the Conservative councillor who referred to Jews as Yids that I knew in the seventies was anti-semitic. Though even he wasn't exactly Himmler as he was in favour of sending them all to Israel while rather mysteriously also thinking that a small dash of Jewish blood was somehow beneficial. But that is what people are like when you actually know them. We are often a mess of contradictions and confusion about the stuff we don't actually need to understand to get by in our daily lives. So I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt.
How do you explain Corbyn going to a passover celebration with a Jewish group who were obviously very pleased to see him?
Order Order even for itself overdid the Jewdas stuff as he seemed more outraged at the f*ck capitalism stuff more than anything else, and that aspect is something nobody really cares about much.
Blair advising Macron 'The former Labour prime minister believes that if the EU stands its ground over the Brexit deal, Parliament will cave in and accept a customs union - which would keep Britain yoked to Brussels - or a second referendum that could cancel Brexit altogether. Sources in Paris confirmed to The Telegraph that Mr Blair had been speaking to the French President about Brexit'
Well of course if we delay they'll want even more money. MPs can get good and mad about it, but they have an easy way to at least minimise the delay, three very easy options even.
Putting pressure on May to quit says to me that the Tory opponents of May are still cowards. No taking down her government is not easy for them, nor would the Cabinet abandoning her en masse, but if they think she must stop being PM for the good of party and country they should not leave it in her hands, they have to step up and do it. They haven't, and still want her to fall on her sword, because none of them have a godsdamned clue either.
I'm sure she will eventually quit if a no confidence vote or mass Cabinet walkout looks inevitable, but frankly I don't see how that is any less humiliating than making the opponents actually do those things. Everyone would know why she did it, it would not save any pride, so at least make them take a stand.
Blair advising Macron 'The former Labour prime minister believes that if the EU stands its ground over the Brexit deal, Parliament will cave in and accept a customs union - which would keep Britain yoked to Brussels - or a second referendum that could cancel Brexit altogether. Sources in Paris confirmed to The Telegraph that Mr Blair had been speaking to the French President about Brexit'
Blair is right, though I don't think he was needed to tell Macron and the EU that - their unwillingness to engage in some classic EU style last minute fudging to help the deal get over the line says to me they decided to bank on an all or nothing strategy some time ago.
Yes another reason to ask the public to can the whole ill-conceived Brexit project.
Strange - I saw it as another reason to tell them to stuff it
That's precisely what the Torygraph wanted you to think.
I believe Brexit goes beyond tribal loyalties
I think Leave / Remain are the new tribes.
The parties have not quite caught up yet, with the lukewarm remain of the Labour leadership, and still a large rump of Tory remainers. They'd all be happier in their own LabourLeave/ToryRemain mini parties allied to the main parties, but that's FPTP for you.
Putting pressure on May to quit says to me that the Tory opponents of May are still cowards. No taking down her government is not easy for them, nor would the Cabinet abandoning her en masse, but if they think she must stop being PM for the good of party and country they should not leave it in her hands, they have to step up and do it. They haven't, and still want her to fall on her sword, because none of them have a godsdamned clue either.
I'm sure she will eventually quit if a no confidence vote or mass Cabinet walkout looks inevitable, but frankly I don't see how that is any less humiliating than making the opponents actually do those things. Everyone would know why she did it, it would not save any pride, so at least make them take a stand.
Don't forget they can't force a no confidence vote.
Putting pressure on May to quit says to me that the Tory opponents of May are still cowards. No taking down her government is not easy for them, nor would the Cabinet abandoning her en masse, but if they think she must stop being PM for the good of party and country they should not leave it in her hands, they have to step up and do it. They haven't, and still want her to fall on her sword, because none of them have a godsdamned clue either.
I'm sure she will eventually quit if a no confidence vote or mass Cabinet walkout looks inevitable, but frankly I don't see how that is any less humiliating than making the opponents actually do those things. Everyone would know why she did it, it would not save any pride, so at least make them take a stand.
Don't forget they can't force a no confidence vote.
I was meaning one in the government. A very very radical step for them to take, and harder given Tiggers say they won't be doing that, but a step which technically gives them a chance to get an emergency leader in I believe.
If Brexit is as important to all these MPs as they say, and various options as bad as they say, then more should be willing to destroy their careers to take the necessary action. The Tiggers at least showed some were willing to do that, albeit the Lab lot had other reasons too.
I don't see any pattern that needs explaining. I am not one of his supporters either. But my objection to his talking to Hezbollah is that it is self indulgent and unlikely to help. It's a rough neighbourhood and they've probably done some bad things, but you can say the same about most of the organisations around there. I'd say avoiding getting involved is the best policy.
But the huge amount of coverage this issue is being given is clearly politically motivated. I wouldn't use the word conspiracy simply because that implies it is being done covertly. This is pretty much out in the open.
I'm genuinely surprised you don't see a pattern. I look forward to you giving your political antagonists similar benefit of the doubt in the future!
So another question: if you are going to ignore all the above (and it was not a comprehensive list), what would he have to do or say to convince you that he is anti-Semitic? If you use the criteria you mentioned in your first post, that's a rather high bar!
On another point: even if you think he isn't anti-Semitic, this mess is not the result of his opponents. It's all down to him, and his inability to stop the mess within his party. He had an opportunity with the Chakrabati report a couple of years ago, but all he ever does is poor fuel on the fire. You might want to consider why that might be.
I don't know if he's antisemitic. I'm not a mind reader. Neither are you. I am pretty sure the Conservative councillor who referred to Jews as Yids that I knew in the seventies was anti-semitic. Though even he wasn't exactly Himmler as he was in favour of sending them all to Israel while rather mysteriously also thinking that a small dash of Jewish blood was somehow beneficial. But that is what people are like when you actually know them. We are often a mess of contradictions and confusion about the stuff we don't actually need to understand to get by in our daily lives. So I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt.
How do you explain Corbyn going to a passover celebration with a Jewish group who were obviously very pleased to see him?
Order Order even for itself overdid the Jewdas stuff as he seemed more outraged at the f*ck capitalism stuff more than anything else, and that aspect is something nobody really cares about much.
So Corbyn a left wing politician hooks up with a left wing Jewish group. Isn't that sort of what you'd expect?
As to the mural, I wouldn't have twigged that it was anti-semitic if I hadn't been told it was. Would you have done? Now it is pointed out I can see it. But as gaffes go it is about on the same level as Amber Rudd's the other day. Does that make Rudd a racist? Hardly.
This whole anti-semitic thing has been used as a very effective stick to beat the Labour Party and Corbyn in particular. It is the latest in a long line of attack strategies that have been used. The IRA ones and the Communist ones fell flat. This one seems to resonate for some reason.
I'd rather make my own mind up.
That mural was absolutely, obviously and unambiguously anti-semitic. It could have come straight out of 1930s Nazi propaganda. There is no way whatsoever that anyone of Corbyn's age and experience, who has the gall to claim that he has 'been fighting anti-semitism all his life', should not have recognised it as such. What the hell does 'fighting anti-semitism all his life' mean if he can't even recognise the most blatant examples of it?
The clear conclusion is that it didn't shock him because he agrees with it. There is no plausible way out of this: he clearly believes that 'the few' (bankers, capitalists, Americans, Tories, Jews) are parasites deliberately living off the honest work of 'the many' (a vaguer concept, the details of which don't interest him). It's the classic anti-semitism of the left, and of other populist demagogues.
Agree. It is simply not possible for someone with any kind of education to see that mural and not think, “anti-Semitic”.
Whatever people feel about Gove he’s written a good piece for the Daily Mail .
He says leaving without a deal wouldn’t honour commitments made during the EU referendum campaign and would leave the country with no chance of uniting .
On both those I agree , no deal will see the divisions turn even more ugly than they are now .
So Corbyn a left wing politician hooks up with a left wing Jewish group. Isn't that sort of what you'd expect?
As to the mural, I wouldn't have twigged that it was anti-semitic if I hadn't been told it was. Would you have done? Now it is pointed out I can see it. But as gaffes go it is about on the same level as Amber Rudd's the other day. Does that make Rudd a racist? Hardly.
This whole anti-semitic thing has been used as a very effective stick to beat the Labour Party and Corbyn in particular. It is the latest in a long line of attack strategies that have been used. The IRA ones and the Communist ones fell flat. This one seems to resonate for some reason.
I'd rather make my own mind up.
That mural was absolutely, obviously and unambiguously anti-semitic. It could have come straight out of 1930s Nazi propaganda. There is no way whatsoever that anyone of Corbyn's age and experience, who has the gall to claim that he has 'been fighting anti-semitism all his life', should not have recognised it as such. What the hell does 'fighting anti-semitism all his life' mean if he can't even recognise the most blatant examples of it?
The clear conclusion is that it didn't shock him because he agrees with it. There is no plausible way out of this: he clearly believes that 'the few' (bankers, capitalists, Americans, Tories, Jews) are parasites deliberately living off the honest work of 'the many' (a vaguer concept, the details of which don't interest him). It's the classic anti-semitism of the left, and of other populist demagogues.
Agree. It is simply not possible for someone with any kind of education to see that mural and not think, “anti-Semitic”.
However, didn’t Corbyn deny actually seeing it?
Oh he saw it
Edit - or he is the biggest idiot on planet and commented on something he didn't read.
I don't see any pattern that needs explaining. I am not one of his supporters either. But my objection to his talking to Hezbollah is that it is self indulgent and unlikely to help. It's a rough neighbourhood and they've probably done some bad things, but you can say the same about most of the organisations around there. I'd say avoiding getting involved is the best policy.
But the huge amount of coverage this issue is being given is clearly politically motivated. I wouldn't use the word conspiracy simply because that implies it is being done covertly. This is pretty much out in the open.
I'm genuinely surprised you don't see a pattern. I look forward to you giving your political antagonists similar benefit of the doubt in the future!
So another question: if you are going to ignore all the above (and it was not a comprehensive list), what would he have to do or say to convince you that he is anti-Semitic? If you use the criteria you mentioned in your first post, that's a rather high bar!
On another point: even if you think he isn't anti-Semitic, this mess is not the result of his opponents. It's all down to him, and his inability to stop the mess within his party. He had an opportunity with the Chakrabati report a couple of years ago, but all he ever does is poor fuel on the fire. You might want to consider why that might be.
I don't know if he's antisemitic. I'm not a mind reader. Neither are you. I am pretty sure the Conservative councillor who referred to Jews as Yids that I knew in the seventies was anti-semitic. Though even he wasn't exactly Himmler as he was in favour of sending them all to Israel while rather mysteriously also thinking that a small dash of Jewish blood was somehow beneficial. But that is what people are like when you actually know them. We are often a mess of contradictions and confusion about the stuff we don't actually need to understand to get by in our daily lives. So I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt.
How do you explain Corbyn going to a passover celebration with a Jewish group who were obviously very pleased to see him?
Order Order even for itself overdid the Jewdas stuff as he seemed more outraged at the f*ck capitalism stuff more than anything else, and that aspect is something nobody really cares about much.
and the rest?
I dont remember it sticking to Corbyn then so I dont see why it will now .
Thousands of people who invested in a high-risk bond scheme marketed as a "Fixed Rate ISA" fear they have lost everything after the company collapsed."
Already discussed - the type of product being offered 'mini bonds' isn't regulated by the FCA and I bet many people bought them as they thought they were ISA eligible -The selling of ISAs of course are regulated.
Absolutely staggering that the FCA were warned about this in 2015 but did nothing for three years. Given that the scam was promoted with ads claiming FCA authorisation, that must be the biggest failure of consumer protection in the financial sector in decades, if not longer.
I know someone who has potentially lost a five figure sum in this, after I warned them not to put their money into it. Thankfully I have all the screenshots proving it as well. My words were "it looks extremely dodgy and I wouldn't invest my own money into this scheme". Oh well.
I wonder what convinced your acquaintance it was okay to invest in this scheme despite your warnings?
Overall there were 11,605 investors and a total of £236 million, so an average of about £20k each.
I love this thread. Anthropologists study morality by taking averages.
We are back in 1890 with Fraser.
The Golden Bough 2nd Edition for what they think is an individualistic world.
???
Let me be a bit less elliptical.
Frazer was an anthropologist who spent iirc 20 years (1875-1895) travelling around the world trying to understand all the religions, and how they developed, and what lay behind them. He then wrote a book called The Golden Bough (title is an allusion to an incident in the Aeneid).
It is much of the root of attempts to study comparative religion, and was influential in atheist movements in academe in the 1920s-30s - eg heavy impact on CS Lewis, who moved in such circles before his famous incident on the Headington bus.
That process reminded me of the current attempt by the Academics to find a common morality mentioned ATL.
History repeating itself !
Available at Project Gutenburg, but you'll need the resolve of a Polar Explorer to get through the whole thing. They have the very very abridged 1922 version which is 400k words. The longest edition is iirc 12 volumes. http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/3623
So Corbyn a left wing politician hooks up with a left wing Jewish group. Isn't that sort of what you'd expect?
As to the mural, I wouldn't have twigged that it was anti-semitic if I hadn't been told it was. Would you have done? Now it is pointed out I can see it. But as gaffes go it is about on the same level as Amber Rudd's the other day. Does that make Rudd a racist? Hardly.
This whole anti-semitic thing has been used as a very effective stick to beat the Labour Party and Corbyn in particular. It is the latest in a long line of attack strategies that have been used. The IRA ones and the Communist ones fell flat. This one seems to resonate for some reason.
I'd rather make my own mind up.
That mural was absolutely, obviously and unambiguously anti-semitic. It could have come straight out of 1930s Nazi propaganda. There is no way whatsoever that anyone of Corbyn's age and experience, who has the gall to claim that he has 'been fighting anti-semitism all his life', should not have recognised it as such. What the hell does 'fighting anti-semitism all his life' mean if he can't even recognise the most blatant examples of it?
The clear conclusion is that it didn't shock him because he agrees with it. There is no plausible way out of this: he clearly believes that 'the few' (bankers, capitalists, Americans, Tories, Jews) are parasites deliberately living off the honest work of 'the many' (a vaguer concept, the details of which don't interest him). It's the classic anti-semitism of the left, and of other populist demagogues.
Agree. It is simply not possible for someone with any kind of education to see that mural and not think, “anti-Semitic”.
However, didn’t Corbyn deny actually seeing it?
Oh he saw it
Edit - or he is the biggest idiot on planet and commented on something he didn't read.
That mural was absolutely, obviously and unambiguously anti-semitic. It could have come straight out of 1930s Nazi propaganda. There is no way whatsoever that anyone of Corbyn's age and experience, who has the gall to claim that he has 'been fighting anti-semitism all his life', should not have recognised it as such. What the hell does 'fighting anti-semitism all his life' mean if he can't even recognise the most blatant examples of it?
Well, I'm of a similar age and background, and I've just had a look myself - like Recidivist, I can't say I saw it as you do. The most prominent things are the Illuminati symbol (which I only know from the card game about silly conspiracy theories) and the Monopoly board - the people sitting round it are presumably supposed to be old-fashioned wicked capitalists. It wouldn't occur to me that they were Jewish. I'm not denying that it's obvious to you (and apparently many others), just pointing out that different people see the same things differently.
As with EdM's Howard=Fagin poster, which I positively liked, as a leftie it's the anti-capitalist message that I noticed - I never really think about religion or speculate what people are unless they really make a point of it. I dare say Corbyn and EdM have a similar outlook, and perhaps the lesson there is not to praise any satirical artwork until you've checked how other peopole see it.
More tellingly, the attempt to suggest it was not blatantly obviously anti semitic rather overlooks that if that was a plausible explanation Corbyn and his team would have used it (though of course online supporters are apparently still pushing that). That they went for the excuse that he somehow decided to support it even though he didn't look at it, gives the game away that they know damn well the image was anti-semitic. People don't use an excuse like that unless it's the only one they have remaining, because it is to admit stupidity.
So we can either accept the explanation that he acted dumbly, or believe he supported it despite knowing what it was. I'll leave it to the individual to decide which they choose to believe on that front, but given the excuse he himself gave in expressing regret for his actions there, what we cannot plausibly do is act like it was not an obviously offensive image.
To do otherwise would be another example of his core supporters suggesting Corbyn is a liar.
We get down to this Corbyn supporters suggesting he is a liar line from you a lot but it tends to involves assuming things either Corbyn or Corbyn supporters haven't actually said.
Has it ever occurred to you that the series of assumptions you seem to make off just a few words aren't the holy truth and you are actually capable of making mistakes?
For example for simple PR reasons can you understand why somebody could move the argument past whether the image was AS or not regardless of their thoughts on the matter?
Now I don't know for sure this happened, but neither do you.
This whole Corbyn supporters are calling him a liar meme is a bit boring because Corbyn supporters don't make the series of assumptions you do. People who think exactly like you probably are calling Corbyn a liar, but those people probably aren't Corbyn supporters.
In regards to the actual poster the main problem I had in identifying it as anti Jewish is I thought they were just a bunch of old white (non Jewish) men on the monopoly table.
Without knowing which one is which I can't actually tell who the 2 Jewish people are supposed to be, they look like exactly like the non Jewish men at the board.
Blair advising Macron 'The former Labour prime minister believes that if the EU stands its ground over the Brexit deal, Parliament will cave in and accept a customs union - which would keep Britain yoked to Brussels - or a second referendum that could cancel Brexit altogether. Sources in Paris confirmed to The Telegraph that Mr Blair had been speaking to the French President about Brexit'
Blair is right, though I don't think he was needed to tell Macron and the EU that - their unwillingness to engage in some classic EU style last minute fudging to help the deal get over the line says to me they decided to bank on an all or nothing strategy some time ago.
It is clear that the EU have not been negotiating in good faith. To be fair there is no reason for them to do so while they are encouraged by the siren voices from the likes of Blair and the very real equivocation on display in the UK parliament.
It follows that further negotiations on the UK's future long term trading relationship with the EU should not take place until after we have left on 29th March.
That mural was absolutely, obviously and unambiguously anti-semitic. It could have come straight out of 1930s Nazi propaganda. There is no way whatsoever that anyone of Corbyn's age and experience, who has the gall to claim that he has 'been fighting anti-semitism all his life', should not have recognised it as such. What the hell does 'fighting anti-semitism all his life' mean if he can't even recognise the most blatant examples of it?
Well, I'm of a similar age and background, and I've just had a look myself - like Recidivist, I can't say I saw it as you do. The most prominent things are the Illuminati symbol (which I only know from the card game about silly conspiracy theories) and the Monopoly board - the people sitting round it are presumably supposed to be old-fashioned wicked capitalists. It wouldn't occur to me that they were Jewish. I'm not denying that it's obvious to you (and apparently many others), just pointing out that different people see the same things differently.
As with EdM's Howard=Fagin poster, which I positively liked, as a leftie it's the anti-capitalist message that I noticed - I never really think about religion or speculate what people are unless they really make a point of it. I dare say Corbyn and EdM have a similar outlook, and perhaps the lesson there is not to praise any satirical artwork until you've checked how other peopole see it.
I find your response extraordinary. How can any reasonably educated person not understand the associations between anti-capitalist tropes and anti-Jewish ones and how they very often borrow from and meld into each other? This is standard stuff that has been around from the 19th century and has been used by all sorts of illiberal groups. You’d need to be blind to or ignorant of pretty much all 20th century history not to understand the references or the subliminal messages.
What was anti-capitalist about the Howard poster? It was exclusively focused on an individual making him look sinister and giving him a fob watch - in 2005 for God’s sake!
All the more curious for such a long time and apparently energetic anti-racist campaigner as Corbyn not to be aware. Odd really because self-proclaimed anti-racists are usually very quick to pounce on any unfortunate word or image by others and yet well-known and well-used anti-semitic tropes pass them by. Most curious.
Thousands of people who invested in a high-risk bond scheme marketed as a "Fixed Rate ISA" fear they have lost everything after the company collapsed."
Why the fca allowed peer to peer and these alternative finance things to become isa eligible and so the badge of respectability that gave I'll never know. As an IFA it's simple if something is offering 8pct then it's v high risk and also v hard to assess.... So bargepole every time as otherwise its our neck and then the fscs underwriting these things.... No thank you.
George Osborne made this change in the 2015 Budget - not the FCA.
In theory you can lose 100% of your money in a stock and shares ISA - its up to the investor to assess their appetite for risk. Only cash isas and help to buy isas and cash based lifetime isas are risk free as they are subject to the £85k FSCS compensation scheme if the provider goes bust. Any other ISA is risky - and some are more risky than others.
So Corbyn a left wing politician hooks up with a left wing Jewish group. Isn't that sort of what you'd expect?
As to the mural, I wouldn't have twigged that it was anti-semitic if I hadn't been told it was. Would you have done? Now it is pointed out I can see it. But as gaffes go it is about on the same level as Amber Rudd's the other day. Does that make Rudd a racist? Hardly.
This whole anti-semitic thing has been used as a very effective stick to beat the Labour Party and Corbyn in particular. It is the latest in a long line of attack strategies that have been used. The IRA ones and the Communist ones fell flat. This one seems to resonate for some reason.
"But as gaffes go it is about on the same level as Amber Rudd's the other day"
No. Just no.
"This whole anti-Semitic thing has been used as a very effective stick to beat the Labour Party and Corbyn in particular."
Yes, it has been a very effective stick. That does not mean that it is incorrect, or that Corbyn and Labour are in the right on it. He's had over two years to put the issue to bed, and could have done very easily. Yet he has not. Perhaps you should start asking yourself why that is? Why has he allowed this issue to drag on so much?
In addition, note that many people within Labour also say the same: including MPs who have served the party for years or decades. I now the faithful now proclaim them as heretics, but perhaps it is the faithful who are in the wrong?
"This one seems to resonate for some reason."
I'm unsurprised you cannot see why this one resonates, when you cannot even see why that mural might be seen as anti-Semitic. Racism is nasty. A form of racism is apparently deep within the heart of your party, and includes someone who proudly self-proclaims as an anti-racist.
In regards to the actual poster the main problem I had in identifying it as anti Jewish is I thought they were just a bunch of old white (non Jewish) men on the monopoly table.
Without knowing which one is which I can't actually tell who the 2 Jewish people are supposed to be, they look like exactly like the non Jewish men at the board.
Comments
"We understood that honest politics can't revolve around the word "again."
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/10/opinions/2020-election-trump-buttigieg/index.html
hmmmm
We are back in 1890 with Fraser.
The Golden Bough 2nd Edition for what they think is an individualistic world.
Yeah, I'm ok with that.
No, me neither.
LOL
https://order-order.com/2018/04/02/corbyn-last-night-met-far-left-group-who-attacked-his-jewish-critics-as-non-jews/
As to the mural, I wouldn't have twigged that it was anti-semitic if I hadn't been told it was. Would you have done? Now it is pointed out I can see it. But as gaffes go it is about on the same level as Amber Rudd's the other day. Does that make Rudd a racist? Hardly.
This whole anti-semitic thing has been used as a very effective stick to beat the Labour Party and Corbyn in particular. It is the latest in a long line of attack strategies that have been used. The IRA ones and the Communist ones fell flat. This one seems to resonate for some reason.
I'd rather make my own mind up.
"One Downing Street insider said the week ahead looked 'choppy'"
Well, no shit Sherlock.
Plus there were some dodgy comparison websites which put this firm at the top of their list and thereby attracted investors. Those websites are not regulated by the FCA.
However, the fact that the FCA did nothing about this despite being warned is very poor indeed on the part of the FCA. It's not enough to give warnings. They should have taken active steps to close the scam down.
The clear conclusion is that it didn't shock him because he agrees with it. There is no plausible way out of this: he clearly believes that 'the few' (bankers, capitalists, Americans, Tories, Jews) are parasites deliberately living off the honest work of 'the many' (a vaguer concept, the details of which don't interest him). It's the classic anti-semitism of the left, and of other populist demagogues.
The UK would be paying for the transition so this makes no difference , an extension just takes the place of the transition with the same payments .
So we can either accept the explanation that he acted dumbly, or believe he supported it despite knowing what it was. I'll leave it to the individual to decide which they choose to believe on that front, but given the excuse he himself gave in expressing regret for his actions there, what we cannot plausibly do is act like it was not an obviously offensive image.
To do otherwise would be another example of his core supporters suggesting Corbyn is a liar.
However, didn’t Corbyn deny actually seeing it?
Sources in Paris confirmed to The Telegraph that Mr Blair had been speaking to the French President about Brexit'
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/10/tony-blair-secretly-advising-emmanuel-macron-brexit-former-pm/?li_source=LI&li_medium=li-recommendation-widget
I'm sure she will eventually quit if a no confidence vote or mass Cabinet walkout looks inevitable, but frankly I don't see how that is any less humiliating than making the opponents actually do those things. Everyone would know why she did it, it would not save any pride, so at least make them take a stand.
If Brexit is as important to all these MPs as they say, and various options as bad as they say, then more should be willing to destroy their careers to take the necessary action. The Tiggers at least showed some were willing to do that, albeit the Lab lot had other reasons too.
He says leaving without a deal wouldn’t honour commitments made during the EU referendum campaign and would leave the country with no chance of uniting .
On both those I agree , no deal will see the divisions turn even more ugly than they are now .
Overall there were 11,605 investors and a total of £236 million, so an average of about £20k each.
Frazer was an anthropologist who spent iirc 20 years (1875-1895) travelling around the world trying to understand all the religions, and how they developed, and what lay behind them. He then wrote a book called The Golden Bough (title is an allusion to an incident in the Aeneid).
It is much of the root of attempts to study comparative religion, and was influential in atheist movements in academe in the 1920s-30s - eg heavy impact on CS Lewis, who moved in such circles before his famous incident on the Headington bus.
That process reminded me of the current attempt by the Academics to find a common morality mentioned ATL.
History repeating itself !
Available at Project Gutenburg, but you'll need the resolve of a Polar Explorer to get through the whole thing. They have the very very abridged 1922 version which is 400k words. The longest edition is iirc 12 volumes.
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/3623
As with EdM's Howard=Fagin poster, which I positively liked, as a leftie it's the anti-capitalist message that I noticed - I never really think about religion or speculate what people are unless they really make a point of it. I dare say Corbyn and EdM have a similar outlook, and perhaps the lesson there is not to praise any satirical artwork until you've checked how other peopole see it.
Has it ever occurred to you that the series of assumptions you seem to make off just a few words aren't the holy truth and you are actually capable of making mistakes?
For example for simple PR reasons can you understand why somebody could move the argument past whether the image was AS or not regardless of their thoughts on the matter?
Now I don't know for sure this happened, but neither do you.
This whole Corbyn supporters are calling him a liar meme is a bit boring because Corbyn supporters don't make the series of assumptions you do. People who think exactly like you probably are calling Corbyn a liar, but those people probably aren't Corbyn supporters.
Without knowing which one is which I can't actually tell who the 2 Jewish people are supposed to be, they look like exactly like the non Jewish men at the board.
It follows that further negotiations on the UK's future long term trading relationship with the EU should not take place until after we have left on 29th March.
What was anti-capitalist about the Howard poster? It was exclusively focused on an individual making him look sinister and giving him a fob watch - in 2005 for God’s sake!
All the more curious for such a long time and apparently energetic anti-racist campaigner as Corbyn not to be aware. Odd really because self-proclaimed anti-racists are usually very quick to pounce on any unfortunate word or image by others and yet well-known and well-used anti-semitic tropes pass them by. Most curious.
In theory you can lose 100% of your money in a stock and shares ISA - its up to the investor to assess their appetite for risk. Only cash isas and help to buy isas and cash based lifetime isas are risk free as they are subject to the £85k FSCS compensation scheme if the provider goes bust. Any other ISA is risky - and some are more risky than others.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/28/antisemitism-open-your-eyes-jeremy-corbyn-labour
"But as gaffes go it is about on the same level as Amber Rudd's the other day"
No. Just no.
"This whole anti-Semitic thing has been used as a very effective stick to beat the Labour Party and Corbyn in particular."
Yes, it has been a very effective stick. That does not mean that it is incorrect, or that Corbyn and Labour are in the right on it. He's had over two years to put the issue to bed, and could have done very easily. Yet he has not. Perhaps you should start asking yourself why that is? Why has he allowed this issue to drag on so much?
In addition, note that many people within Labour also say the same: including MPs who have served the party for years or decades. I now the faithful now proclaim them as heretics, but perhaps it is the faithful who are in the wrong?
"This one seems to resonate for some reason."
I'm unsurprised you cannot see why this one resonates, when you cannot even see why that mural might be seen as anti-Semitic. Racism is nasty. A form of racism is apparently deep within the heart of your party, and includes someone who proudly self-proclaims as an anti-racist.