40% of Conservatives agreed with one anti-semitic statement 32% of Labour agreed with one anti-semitic statement
We are discussing the Parliamentary Labour Party. Those figures are not about parliamentary parties. They are not about parties at all. They are about "supporters" of parties. This does not merely weaken your point, it exposes it as complete nonsense.
Well this is the comment of yours I was replying to.
'You do realise he is leader of the Labour party, do you, or do you just think that even if he is, he has no responsibility for anyone's actions and omissions other than his own?'
And the conversation was also about anti-semitism.
So considering your point was apparently about the PLP.
What anti-semitism by the PLP led by Corbyn has been caused by his actions or omissions?!
I'd call your point nonsense but at this point I'm struggling to understand what point you are trying to make.... usually the idea is the other members of the PLP are the good guys and Corbyn the bad guy.
Surely "struggling to understand" is your default mode?
Mr. Meeks, do you believe everyone who voted leave must necessarily endorse (or specifically recant) everything everyone who campaigned to leave did and said?
If not, then surely you'd accept there were various reasons to vote for leave, as there were for remain, and that voting one way or another does not imply or demand that a given individual supports everything the very many groups and individuals in either campaign did?
Don't try to be reasonable to a fanatic. Particularly when they reject anyone who does recant as asked, demonstrating that is not actually the goal, but a mere fig leaf
He asks that Leavers reach out to Remainers and their concerns as a way of making them engage with him. Then, when they do so, he personally accuses them of moral turpitude, and provokes then to respond to prove his point, usually by insulting their intelligence.
It’s a form of sport to him. If he’s consistently ignored he’ll soon get bored of it.
I make a direct point that none of the Leavers on here has even tried to answer: how do Leavers think they can condemn Jeremy Corbyn's complaisance towards anti-Semitism when they themselves have rallied behind a flag of xenophobic lies?
Sooner or later Leavers are going to realise that they cannot simply pretend that the manner of their victory is now history. It is going to contaminate British politics for decades and it is only going to get worse the longer Leavers try to ignore the problem.
So how many silver bullets is it that the PB Tories have loaded up against Jezzah?
I make it:
Association with IRA Association with Hamas Association with Venezuela Being a Stalinist/Communist/Marxist Not wearing a tie Bonking Abbott Not immediately demanding a nuclear strike on Moscow after Salisbury
Good luck with the freshly minted hollow point antisemitism round, lads.
Yes it won't take him down. It's still relevant considering he admits the party needs to get to grips with this.
I never understood why his past with Abbott was relevant. It's nice they have remained friends for so long.
I think it is relevant - would she have been promoted to such high profile positions if they hadn't had a pre-existing relationship?
Given her past record, it is hard to make a case for her promotion being on merit.
She was Shad Min Health under Miliband, and got Home sec at a time nobody else wanted the gig.
She was a junior shadow minister - and then got sacked. Not exactly a track record of excellence
Mr. Meeks, do you believe everyone who voted leave must necessarily endorse (or specifically recant) everything everyone who campaigned to leave did and said?
If not, then surely you'd accept there were various reasons to vote for leave, as there were for remain, and that voting one way or another does not imply or demand that a given individual supports everything the very many groups and individuals in either campaign did?
Apply your logic to Corbyn and the stench of anti-Semitism around him and you're giving a free pass to Labour members and supporters.
Yet people on here and elsewhere were defending Farage's Nazi era posters.
When someone commits a really bad act, you need to call them out on it.
The difference being of course that was used and campaigned on for Brexit, the anti-semitism has been used against rather than positively for Corbyn and Labour. Corbyn hasn't once come out and made speeches as leader were he even dog whistled to the idea of anti-semitism to anywhere near the extent that was done for Brexit.
Ask yourself whether if in this current environment you were, say, a Labour Party member, or perhaps even MP or aide who was antisemitic, whether the fact that Corbyn was leader of your party would make you more or less willing to indulge or let be known your predilection? Would you feel more or less inhibited in letting your views be known?
I imagine my joy at Palestinian suffering would have to be reeled in but could maybe be made up for by being more open about being happy about Israeli suffering, if I was an anti-semite.
There are two sides involved in the Israel-Palestine conflict that are different from us, the idea that supported one side excites racists and supporting the other doesn't is inaccurate. There are plenty of people who have a very negative view of Arabs. Although there are other people who are racist who like Israel for other reasons.
I wouldn't call it as clean cut as Brexit, where say if you did vote for racist reasons you would probably vote leave. There could be an argument for a racist remain vote on the basis that Brexit could increase non-EU immigration but it seems like a stretch to suggest many racists would have voted on that basis.
Which doesn't mean that Brexit or its supporters are all racist or the cause is somehow invalid. I've always (I'm pretty sure) avoided the racist leave idea except to make points elsewhere, as I'm doing now.
Mr. Meeks, do you believe everyone who voted leave must necessarily endorse (or specifically recant) everything everyone who campaigned to leave did and said?
If not, then surely you'd accept there were various reasons to vote for leave, as there were for remain, and that voting one way or another does not imply or demand that a given individual supports everything the very many groups and individuals in either campaign did?
Don't try to be reasonable to a fanatic. Particularly when they reject anyone who does recant as asked, demonstrating that is not actually the goal, but a mere fig leaf
He asks that Leavers reach out to Remainers and their concerns as a way of making them engage with him. Then, when they do so, he personally accuses them of moral turpitude, and provokes then to respond to prove his point, usually by insulting their intelligence.
It’s a form of sport to him. If he’s consistently ignored he’ll soon get bored of it.
I make a direct point that none of the Leavers on here has even tried to answer: how do Leavers think they can condemn Jeremy Corbyn's complaisance towards anti-Semitism when they themselves have rallied behind a flag of xenophobic lies?
Sooner or later Leavers are going to realise that they cannot simply pretend that the manner of their victory is now history. It is going to contaminate British politics for decades and it is only going to get worse the longer Leavers try to ignore the problem.
Good grief.
A new highwater mark for wibble.
If you roll around in the gutter, you can't later get on your high horse. Leave showed that campaigning on hate and fear works. We can expect to see lots more of it from all sides. Leave supporters are in no position to complain about it.
Mr. Meeks, do you believe everyone who voted leave must necessarily endorse (or specifically recant) everything everyone who campaigned to leave did and said?
If not, then surely you'd accept there were various reasons to vote for leave, as there were for remain, and that voting one way or another does not imply or demand that a given individual supports everything the very many groups and individuals in either campaign did?
Don't try to be reasonable to a fanatic. Particularly when they reject anyone who does recant as asked, demonstrating that is not actually the goal, but a mere fig leaf
He asks that Leavers reach out to Remainers and their concerns as a way of making them engage with him. Then, when they do so, he personally accuses them of moral turpitude, and provokes then to respond to prove his point, usually by insulting their intelligence.
It’s a form of sport to him. If he’s consistently ignored he’ll soon get bored of it.
I make a direct point that none of the Leavers on here has even tried to answer: how do Leavers think they can condemn Jeremy Corbyn's complaisance towards anti-Semitism when they themselves have rallied behind a flag of xenophobic lies?
Sooner or later Leavers are going to realise that they cannot simply pretend that the manner of their victory is now history. It is going to contaminate British politics for decades and it is only going to get worse the longer Leavers try to ignore the problem.
Good grief.
A new highwater mark for wibble.
If you roll around in the gutter, you can't later get on your high horse. Leave showed that campaigning on hate and fear works. We can expect to see lots more of it from all sides. Leave supporters are in no position to complain about it.
I normally don't weigh in on this particular subject. But Project Fear was a large part of the Remain campaign.
The dire warnings about emergency budgets and economic collapse came from Remain. That was a campaign based on fear.
Mr. Meeks, do you believe everyone who voted leave must necessarily endorse (or specifically recant) everything everyone who campaigned to leave did and said?
If not, then surely you'd accept there were various reasons to vote for leave, as there were for remain, and that voting one way or another does not imply or demand that a given individual supports everything the very many groups and individuals in either campaign did?
Don't try to be reasonable to a fanatic. Particularly when they reject anyone who does recant as asked, demonstrating that is not actually the goal, but a mere fig leaf
He asks that Leavers reach out to Remainers and their concerns as a way of making them engage with him. Then, when they do so, he personally accuses them of moral turpitude, and provokes then to respond to prove his point, usually by insulting their intelligence.
It’s a form of sport to him. If he’s consistently ignored he’ll soon get bored of it.
I make a direct point that none of the Leavers on here has even tried to answer: how do Leavers think they can condemn Jeremy Corbyn's complaisance towards anti-Semitism when they themselves have rallied behind a flag of xenophobic lies?
Sooner or later Leavers are going to realise that they cannot simply pretend that the manner of their victory is now history. It is going to contaminate British politics for decades and it is only going to get worse the longer Leavers try to ignore the problem.
Good grief.
A new highwater mark for wibble.
If you roll around in the gutter, you can't later get on your high horse. Leave showed that campaigning on hate and fear works. We can expect to see lots more of it from all sides. Leave supporters are in no position to complain about it.
Yet your continuing bile amd hate towards those that disagree with you doesn't stop you from judging others. Hypocrisy abounds.
Mr. Meeks, do you believe everyone who voted leave must necessarily endorse (or specifically recant) everything everyone who campaigned to leave did and said?
If not, then surely you'd accept there were various reasons to vote for leave, as there were for remain, and that voting one way or another does not imply or demand that a given individual supports everything the very many groups and individuals in either campaign did?
Don't try to be reasonable to a fanatic. Particularly when they reject anyone who does recant as asked, demonstrating that is not actually the goal, but a mere fig leaf
He asks that Leavers reach out to Remainers and their concerns as a way of making them engage with him. Then, when they do so, he personally accuses them of moral turpitude, and provokes then to respond to prove his point, usually by insulting their intelligence.
It’s a form of sport to him. If he’s consistently ignored he’ll soon get bored of it.
I make a direct point that none of the Leavers on here has even tried to answer: how do Leavers think they can condemn Jeremy Corbyn's complaisance towards anti-Semitism when they themselves have rallied behind a flag of xenophobic lies?
Sooner or later Leavers are going to realise that they cannot simply pretend that the manner of their victory is now history. It is going to contaminate British politics for decades and it is only going to get worse the longer Leavers try to ignore the problem.
Good grief.
A new highwater mark for wibble.
If you roll around in the gutter, you can't later get on your high horse. Leave showed that campaigning on hate and fear works. We can expect to see lots more of it from all sides. Leave supporters are in no position to complain about it.
Yet your continuing bile amd hate towards those that disagree with you doesn't stop you from judging others. Hypocrisy abounds.
I hate the sins, not the sinners. And I have been precise about what I am criticising.
I appreciate that Leave was sold on a have-cake-and-eat-it basis, but you don't get to campaign on xenophobic lies and not have to deal with the consequences of campaigning on xenophobic lies.
40% of Conservatives agreed with one anti-semitic statement 32% of Labour agreed with one anti-semitic statement
We are discussing the Parliamentary Labour Party. Those figures are not about parliamentary parties. They are not about parties at all. They are about "supporters" of parties. This does not merely weaken your point, it exposes it as complete nonsense.
Well this is the comment of yours I was replying to.
'You do realise he is leader of the Labour party, do you, or do you just think that even if he is, he has no responsibility for anyone's actions and omissions other than his own?'
And the conversation was also about anti-semitism.
So considering your point was apparently about the PLP.
What anti-semitism by the PLP led by Corbyn has been caused by his actions or omissions?!
I'd call your point nonsense but at this point I'm struggling to understand what point you are trying to make.... usually the idea is the other members of the PLP are the good guys and Corbyn the bad guy.
Surely "struggling to understand" is your default mode?
Did you look back and struggle to figure out what the hell you were on about too?
No worries.
Maybe you can try again with either of the different points you were making...
One something to do with the PLP.
The other something to do with Corbyn having some responsibility for others actions and omissions.
I hate the sins, not the sinners. And I have been precise about what I am criticising.
I appreciate that Leave was sold on a have-cake-and-eat-it basis, but you don't get to campaign on xenophobic lies and not have to deal with the consequences of campaigning on xenophobic lies.
What do you think decent Leavers should do to deal with these consequences?
Mr. Meeks, do you believe everyone who voted leave must necessarily endorse (or specifically recant) everything everyone who campaigned to leave did and said?
If not, then surely you'd accept there were various reasons to vote for leave, as there were for remain, and that voting one way or another does not imply or demand that a given individual supports everything the very many groups and individuals in either campaign did?
Don't try to be reasonable to a fanatic. Particularly when they reject anyone who does recant as asked, demonstrating that is not actually the goal, but a mere fig leaf
He asks that Leavers reach out to Remainers and their concerns as a way of making them engage with him. Then, when they do so, he personally accuses them of moral turpitude, and provokes then to respond to prove his point, usually by insulting their intelligence.
It’s a form of sport to him. If he’s consistently ignored he’ll soon get bored of it.
I make a direct point that none of the Leavers on here has even tried to answer: how do Leavers think they can condemn Jeremy Corbyn's complaisance towards anti-Semitism when they themselves have rallied behind a flag of xenophobic lies?
Sooner or later Leavers are going to realise that they cannot simply pretend that the manner of their victory is now history. It is going to contaminate British politics for decades and it is only going to get worse the longer Leavers try to ignore the problem.
Good grief.
A new highwater mark for wibble.
If you roll around in the gutter, you can't later get on your high horse. Leave showed that campaigning on hate and fear works. We can expect to see lots more of it from all sides. Leave supporters are in no position to complain about it.
Stage 1 is denial and stage 2 is anger - this fury - whilst mildy disturbing - suggests however that your glacial progress along the stages of grief is at last underway.
For someone like me who deeply despaired of May long before the worst election campaign in history and its troubled aftermath where the government seemed entirely without direction or purpose the last month or so has been thought provoking.
Is it possible that she just took quite a while to grow into the job? Its a big step up but on both Brexit and Salisbury she is considerably exceeding expectations.
Mr. Meeks, do you believe everyone who voted leave must necessarily endorse (or specifically recant) everything everyone who campaigned to leave did and said?
If not, then surely you'd accept there were various reasons to vote for leave, as there were for remain, and that voting one way or another does not imply or demand that a given individual supports everything the very many groups and individuals in either campaign did?
Apply your logic to Corbyn and the stench of anti-Semitism around him and you're giving a free pass to Labour members and supporters.
Yet people on here and elsewhere were defending Farage's Nazi era posters.
When someone commits a really bad act, you need to call them out on it.
The difference being of course that was used and campaigned on for Brexit, the anti-semitism has been used against rather than positively for Corbyn and Labour. Corbyn hasn't once come out and made speeches as leader were he even dog whistled to the idea of anti-semitism to anywhere near the extent that was done for Brexit.
Ask yourself whether if in this current environment you were, say, a Labour Party member, or perhaps even MP or aide who was antisemitic, whether the fact that Corbyn was leader of your party would make you more or less willing to indulge or let be known your predilection? Would you feel more or less inhibited in letting your views be known?
I imagine my joy at Palestinian suffering would have to be reeled in but could maybe be made up for by being more open about being happy about Israeli suffering, if I was an anti-semite.
There are two sides involved in the Israel-Palestine conflict that are different from us, the idea that supported one side excites racists and supporting the other doesn't is inaccurate. There are plenty of people who have a very negative view of Arabs. Although there are other people who are racist who like Israel for other reasons.
I wouldn't call it as clean cut as Brexit, where say if you did vote for racist reasons you would probably vote leave. There could be an argument for a racist remain vote on the basis that Brexit could increase non-EU immigration but it seems like a stretch to suggest many racists would have voted on that basis.
Which doesn't mean that Brexit or its supporters are all racist or the cause is somehow invalid. I've always (I'm pretty sure) avoided the racist leave idea except to make points elsewhere, as I'm doing now.
Operation Black Vote had a rather racist stereotype of white people as part of their GOTV campaign for Remain.
So how many silver bullets is it that the PB Tories have loaded up against Jezzah?
I make it:
Association with IRA Association with Hamas Association with Venezuela Being a Stalinist/Communist/Marxist Not wearing a tie Bonking Abbott Not immediately demanding a nuclear strike on Moscow after Salisbury
Good luck with the freshly minted hollow point antisemitism round, lads.
Yes it won't take him down. It's still relevant considering he admits the party needs to get to grips with this.
I never understood why his past with Abbott was relevant. It's nice they have remained friends for so long.
I think it is relevant - would she have been promoted to such high profile positions if they hadn't had a pre-existing relationship?
Given her past record, it is hard to make a case for her promotion being on merit.
She was Shad Min Health under Miliband, and got Home sec at a time nobody else wanted the gig.
She was a junior shadow minister - and then got sacked. Not exactly a track record of excellence
No, but just enough to rebut or at least cast doubt on the suggestion of favouritism by Corbyn.
Look on the bright side. Once Brexit is done and dusted, you'll be able to breathe a sigh of relief that it was nowhere as bad as your lurid nightmares. You'll discover that it will be a breath of fresh air and you can console yourself that it seems like BINO compared to your wild imaginings.
No flesh-eating zombies coming for you, no gin-soaked harridans from your fevered imagination, and the sun will continue to shine. In a few short years, you'll be glad you agreed with Brexit after all.
Prince William is looking more and more like Stephen Kinnock by the day and Kate Middleton does not look much different from Helle Thorning Schmidt either
None of the monarchs lined up to come will look impressive next to HM QEII.
Republicanism is coming. 10 years of Charles as King and even the Royal family will be campaigning for a republic.
As a republican we'd be screwed if Prince Harry was the first son not the second son.
If only James Hewitt had met Princess Diana sooner.
Prince Harry and Princess Anne would both be impressive, in my view.
Charles is damaged goods, and I think even he knows it.
Well therein lies the inherent problem with the monarchy system doesn't it? You can't pick and choose your leader. The fact that the current monarch is neutral enough to be deemed vaguely acceptable to most people is just an accident of history. She could just as easily have been a deranged sadist with a penchant for eating live gerbils.
As one of the Lizard Illumanati, presumably she may well eat live gerbils.
For someone like me who deeply despaired of May long before the worst election campaign in history and its troubled aftermath where the government seemed entirely without direction or purpose the last month or so has been thought provoking.
Is it possible that she just took quite a while to grow into the job? Its a big step up but on both Brexit and Salisbury she is considerably exceeding expectations.
Guardian was reporting some progress with the EU on the Irish border. If true really satisfying period for her and she deserves the praise she is getting
I hate the sins, not the sinners. And I have been precise about what I am criticising.
I appreciate that Leave was sold on a have-cake-and-eat-it basis, but you don't get to campaign on xenophobic lies and not have to deal with the consequences of campaigning on xenophobic lies.
What do you think decent Leavers should do to deal with these consequences?
It's an awful mess. There's no easy way, no magic wand. For the referendum was won that way and while that's appalling, the democratic mandate so secured must be honoured.
It all starts with acknowledging the problem. From there, the boundaries of legitimate action in the future can be established.
For someone like me who deeply despaired of May long before the worst election campaign in history and its troubled aftermath where the government seemed entirely without direction or purpose the last month or so has been thought provoking.
Is it possible that she just took quite a while to grow into the job? Its a big step up but on both Brexit and Salisbury she is considerably exceeding expectations.
She possibly is growing into the job, and perhaps being better advised, but as I've said in the past (to much derision), she's actually a reasonably good PM, in terms of managing the business of government. The opprobrium she has been getting over most of the last nine months was never justified.
Her failings are more on the political/presentational, not the governing, side of the job.
Mr. Meeks, do you believe everyone who voted leave must necessarily endorse (or specifically recant) everything everyone who campaigned to leave did and said?
If not, then surely you'd accept there were varioor demand that a given individual supports everything the very many groups and individuals in either campaign did?
Apply your logic to Corbyn and the stench of anti-Semitism around him and you're giving a free pass to Labour members and supporters.
Yet people on here and elsewhere were defending Farage's Nazi era posters.
When someone commits a really bad act, you need to call them out on it.
The difference being of course that was used and campaigned on for Brexit, the anti-semitism has been used against rather than positively for Corbyn and Labour. Corbyn hasn't once come out and made speeches as leader were he even dog whistled to the idea of anti-semitism to anywhere near the extent that was done for Brexit.
Ask yourself whether if in this current environment you were, say, a Labour Party member, or perhaps even MP or aide who was antisemitic, whether the fact that Corbyn was leader of your party would make you more or less willing to indulge or let be known your predilection? Would you feel more or less inhibited in letting your views be known?
I imagine my joy at Palestinian suffering would have to be reeled in but could maybe be made up for by being more open about being happy about Israeli suffering, if I was an anti-semite.
There are two sides involved in the Israel-Palestine conflict that are different from us, the idea that supported one side excites racists and supporting the other doesn't is inaccurate. There are plenty of people who have a very negative view of Arabs. Although there are other people who are racist who like Israel for other reasons.
I wouldn't call it as clean cut as Brexit, where say if you did vote for racist reasons you would probably vote leave. There could be an argument for a racist remain vote on the basis that Brexit could increase non-EU immigration but it seems like a stretch to suggest many racists would have voted on that basis.
Which doesn't mean that Brexit or its supporters are all racist or the cause is somehow invalid. I've always (I'm pretty sure) avoided the racist leave idea except to make points elsewhere, as I'm doing now.
I don't doubt your equal opportunity desire for suffering or benediction one moment.
My point was that IF you were an antisemite, would Jezza's presence as leader of your Party embolden or inhibit you in expressing or not repressing or hinting at your antisemitic views?
Mr. Meeks, do you believe everyone who voted leave must necessarily endorse (or specifically recant) everything everyone who campaigned to leave did and said?
If not, then surely you'd accept there were various reasons to vote for leave, as there were for remain, and that voting one way or another does not imply or demand that a given individual supports everything the very many groups and individuals in either campaign did?
Don't try to be reasonable to a fanatic. Particularly when they reject anyone who does recant as asked, demonstrating that is not actually the goal, but a mere fig leaf
He asks that Leavers reach out to Remainers and their concerns as a way of making them engage with him. Then, when they do so, he personally accuses them of moral turpitude, and provokes then to respond to prove his point, usually by insulting their intelligence.
It’s a form of sport to him. If he’s consistently ignored he’ll soon get bored of it.
I make a direct point that none of the Leavers on here has even tried to answer: how do Leavers think they can condemn Jeremy Corbyn's complaisance towards anti-Semitism when they themselves have rallied behind a flag of xenophobic lies?
Sooner or later Leavers are going to realise that they cannot simply pretend that the manner of their victory is now history. It is going to contaminate British politics for decades and it is only going to get worse the longer Leavers try to ignore the problem.
Good grief.
A new highwater mark for wibble.
If you roll around in the gutter, you can't later get on your high horse. Leave showed that campaigning on hate and fear works. We can expect to see lots more of it from all sides. Leave supporters are in no position to complain about it.
Stage 1 is denial and stage 2 is anger - this fury - whilst mildy disturbing - suggests however that your glacial progress along the stages of grief is at last underway.
The 'stages of grief' bollocks is one of the most tedious and overdone memes on PB, among a very long list. Think of something less boring please.
Puts the Russians in a difficult situation. With the UK it was easy and tit for tat, simply expel the same number of diplomats. But to do that with almost the entire western world is to bite off your own nose to spite your own face. Quite humiliating.
Mr. Meeks, do you believe everyone who voted leave must necessarily endorse (or specifically recant) everything everyone who campaigned to leave did and said?
If not, then surely you'd accept there were various reasons to vote for leave, as there were for remain, and that voting one way or another does not imply or demand that a given individual supports everything the very many groups and individuals in either campaign did?
Don't try to be reasonable to a fanatic. Particularly when they reject anyone who does recant as asked, demonstrating that is not actually the goal, but a mere fig leaf
He asks that Leavers reach out to Remainers and their concerns as a way of making them engage with him. Then, when they do so, he personally accuses them of moral turpitude, and provokes then to respond to prove his point, usually by insulting their intelligence.
It’s a form of sport to him. If he’s consistently ignored he’ll soon get bored of it.
I make a direct point that none of the Leavers on here has even tried to answer: how do Leavers think they can condemn Jeremy Corbyn's complaisance towards anti-Semitism when they themselves have rallied behind a flag of xenophobic lies?
Sooner or later Leavers are going to realise that they cannot simply pretend that the manner of their victory is now history. It is going to contaminate British politics for decades and it is only going to get worse the longer Leavers try to ignore the problem.
Good grief.
A new highwater mark for wibble.
If you roll around in the gutter, you can't later get on your high horse. Leave showed that campaigning on hate and fear works. We can expect to see lots more of it from all sides. Leave supporters are in no position to complain about it.
Stage 1 is denial and stage 2 is anger - this fury - whilst mildy disturbing - suggests however that your glacial progress along the stages of grief is at last underway.
The 'stages of grief' bollocks is one of the most tedious and overdone memes on PB, among a very long list. Think of something less boring please.
Another anti-Corbyn slander? I was having treatment from a medical professional this morning - he's lived in Britain since 1989 but is Czech. We got to talking politics and he told me an interesting story. The Czech police have been conducting investigations into the current prime minister over fraud allegations. During these they uncovered some information about Skripal ( which is a Czech name in origin). They concluded that he knew that Corbyn was not only a Czech asset but also a Soviet one. So Skripal was targeted to stop him revealing Corbyn's status. Isn't conspiracy theory wonderful?
She’s inherited a bit of her father’s temper. But that is really minor stuff.
She is widely respected by most who’ve met her or worked with her, including my wife.
I disagree, The Duke of Edinburgh visited my father and his colleagues a few years back.
An absolute gent they all said, no faffing around him, no temper, put everyone at east straight away, just a lovely old guy that liked to meet new people and learn stuff, very passionate about the deaf.
This is a lovely story about the DoE from a White House butler.
When reflecting on his fondest memory, Westray talks about a time in 1979 when Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip visited the White House. After dinner, Prince Philip went into the Red Room, next to the state dining room. Westray and his buddy were serving liquor. Westray says he was carrying the tray and glasses.
"The prince was in there by himself, which was odd, because everybody else had gone down to the other end of the building," Westray says. "I said, 'Your Majesty, would you care for a cordial?' He says, 'I'll take one if you let me serve it.' What do you do? I didn't do all that because I had the stuff in my hand. And he says, 'If you let me pour it, I'll have one with you.'
"... So he poured it, the one he wanted, and we took the same thing that he had. And we had our drink there together and had a little talk while we were there. He told us if we were ever over there in London to stop at Buckingham Palace and see him. Can you imagine the prince serving you? I enjoyed it. You know, we're not supposed to drink and carry on at that time. We're not guests. It was just the three of us in the room, so nobody knew what happened. And I drank my little cordial, we all drank, and had a little conversation. But that was one thing I'll never forget, having been served by royalty."
I’ve always found Princess Anne respectful and impressive.
The knack some senior Royals have is putting people at their ease - like the Duke.
Many moons ago a friend in the army was deputed to escort the queen mum up some stairs. She gets out of the car & peers up at him (she's tiny, he's tall) 'Young man, are you drunk?'
Shocked, 'No Mam!'
'Well I am so you'd better help me up these stairs'.....
The sort of mildly amusing comment you might get from any decent common or garden granny. No need to venerate her for it because she was born into it.
Whilst there should be public accountability for tragedies like this and I am in no way defending Southern Health for their failings.
But I fail to see what good comes from this sort of fine. It doesn't come out of the pockets of those individuals who were at fault. It is money taken away from front line health care.
I guess that money might get recycled into the NHS budget - but I doubt it.
It is right that justice is done and is seen to be done. It is right for people to be held accountable for their actions and/or failings.
But when it comes to this sort of case a huge fine only takes money away from those who need health care.
It doesn't take money away from shareholders or corporate fat cats. It isn't going to the families by way of compensation.
I don't see what it achieves under these circumstances. The necessary changes within Southern Health were under way anyway. This fine won't make those changes any easier to implement or improve things for those in their care.
Mr. Meeks, do you believe everyone who voted leave must necessarily endorse (or specifically recant) everything everyone who campaigned to leave did and said?
If not, then surely you'd accept there were various reasons to vote for leave, as there were for remain, and that voting one way or another does not imply or demand that a given individual supports everything the very many groups and individuals in either campaign did?
Don't try to be reasonable to a fanatic. Particularly when they reject anyone who does recant as asked, demonstrating that is not actually the goal, but a mere fig leaf
He asks that Leavers reach out to Remainers and their concerns as a way of making them engage with him. Then, when they do so, he personally accuses them of moral turpitude, and provokes then to respond to prove his point, usually by insulting their intelligence.
It’s a form of sport to him. If he’s consistently ignored he’ll soon get bored of it.
I make a direct point that none of the Leavers on here has even tried to answer: how do Leavers think they can condemn Jeremy Corbyn's complaisance towards anti-Semitism when they themselves have rallied behind a flag of xenophobic lies?
Sooner or later Leavers are going to realise that they cannot simply pretend that the manner of their victory is now history. It is going to contaminate British politics for decades and it is only going to get worse the longer Leavers try to ignore the problem.
Good grief.
A new highwater mark for wibble.
If you roll around in the gutter, you can't later get on your high horse. Leave showed that campaigning on hate and fear works. We can expect to see lots more of it from all sides. Leave supporters are in no position to complain about it.
Stage 1 is denial and stage 2 is anger - this fury - whilst mildy disturbing - suggests however that your glacial progress along the stages of grief is at last underway.
The 'stages of grief' bollocks is one of the most tedious and overdone memes on PB, among a very long list. Think of something less boring please.
+1
Though the +1 bollox is just as tedious, I freely admit.
Mr. Meeks, do you believe everyone who voted leave must necessarily endorse (or specifically recant) everything everyone who campaigned to leave did and said?
If not, then surely you'd accept there were various reasons to vote for leave, as there were for remain, and that voting one way or another does not imply or demand that a given individual supports everything the very many groups and individuals in either campaign did?
Don't try to be reasonable to a fanatic. Particularly when they reject anyone who does recant as asked, demonstrating that is not actually the goal, but a mere fig leaf
He asks that Leavers reach out to Remainers and their concerns as a way of making them engage with him. Then, when they do so, he personally accuses them of moral turpitude, and provokes then to respond to prove his point, usually by insulting their intelligence.
It’s a form of sport to him. If he’s consistently ignored he’ll soon get bored of it.
I make a direct point that none of the Leavers on here has even tried to answer: how do Leavers think they can condemn Jeremy Corbyn's complaisance towards anti-Semitism when they themselves have rallied behind a flag of xenophobic lies?
Sooner or later Leavers are going to realise that they cannot simply pretend that the manner of their victory is now history. It is going to contaminate British politics for decades and it is only going to get worse the longer Leavers try to ignore the problem.
Good grief.
A new highwater mark for wibble.
If you roll around in the gutter, you can't later get on your high horse. Leave showed that campaigning on hate and fear works. We can expect to see lots more of it from all sides. Leave supporters are in no position to complain about it.
Stage 1 is denial and stage 2 is anger - this fury - whilst mildy disturbing - suggests however that your glacial progress along the stages of grief is at last underway.
The 'stages of grief' bollocks is one of the most tedious and overdone memes on PB, among a very long list. Think of something less boring please.
So how many silver bullets is it that the PB Tories have loaded up against Jezzah?
I make it:
Association with IRA Association with Hamas Association with Venezuela Being a Stalinist/Communist/Marxist Not wearing a tie Bonking Abbott Not immediately demanding a nuclear strike on Moscow after Salisbury
Good luck with the freshly minted hollow point antisemitism round, lads.
Yes it won't take him down. It's still relevant considering he admits the party needs to get to grips with this.
I never understood why his past with Abbott was relevant. It's nice they have remained friends for so long.
I think it is relevant - would she have been promoted to such high profile positions if they hadn't had a pre-existing relationship?
Given her past record, it is hard to make a case for her promotion being on merit.
She was Shad Min Health under Miliband, and got Home sec at a time nobody else wanted the gig.
She was a junior shadow minister - and then got sacked. Not exactly a track record of excellence
No, but just enough to rebut or at least cast doubt on the suggestion of favouritism by Corbyn.
She was given a junior shadow role because she was one of the defeated candidates for the leadership in 2010. It was an attempt by Miliband to unify the party. Again not really an appointment on merit.
Yes, it goes on in politics all the time. In every party. There are debts to be paid, balances to be maintained.
But Abbott would never have risen to Shadow Cabinet level under any other leader than Corbyn. I would argue that their existing 'closeness' might have played a part in that rise.
Puts the Russians in a difficult situation. With the UK it was easy and tit for tat, simply expel the same number of diplomats. But to do that with almost the entire western world is to bite off your own nose to spite your own face. Quite humiliating.
Very impressive coordination.
Shows the power and determination of the West.
Next should be financial sanctions. Really turn the screw on those surrounding Putin's nasty regime.
I imagine my joy at Palestinian suffering would have to be reeled in but could maybe be made up for by being more open about being happy about Israeli suffering, if I was an anti-semite.
There are two sides involved in the Israel-Palestine conflict that are different from us, the idea that supported one side excites racists and supporting the other doesn't is inaccurate. There are plenty of people who have a very negative view of Arabs. Although there are other people who are racist who like Israel for other reasons.
I wouldn't call it as clean cut as Brexit, where say if you did vote for racist reasons you would probably vote leave. There could be an argument for a racist remain vote on the basis that Brexit could increase non-EU immigration but it seems like a stretch to suggest many racists would have voted on that basis.
Which doesn't mean that Brexit or its supporters are all racist or the cause is somehow invalid. I've always (I'm pretty sure) avoided the racist leave idea except to make points elsewhere, as I'm doing now.
I don't doubt your equal opportunity desire for suffering or benediction one moment.
My point was that IF you were an antisemite, would Jezza's presence as leader of your Party embolden or inhibit you in expressing or not repressing or hinting at your antisemitic views?
I feel you sort of missed my hint there, as I understand both Palestinians and Israelis can be referred to as semites (although maybe I'm wrong here) so racism against either of them can be anti-semitism...
So my answer was, whichever the leader supported more, say Israel in the case of Blair, or Palestine in the case of Corbyn would allow me to feel freer to say my racism to the side my leader didn't support.
Ultimately, as with immigration or Brexit. I don't think it should matter what the racists want, good or bad. Although I would argue my side of the argument probably more often falls on the side more racists don't want, Brexit vs Remain, Trump vs Clinton and Conservatives vs Labour. I can't just dismiss the views of millions and millions of people who aren't racist though, even if in most cases it might help support my viewpoint.
Dismissing peoples legitimate concerns causes more trouble further down the line.
Mr. Meeks, do you believe everyone who voted leave must necessarily endorse (or specifically recant) everything everyone who campaigned to leave did and said?
If not, then surely you'd accept there were various reasons to vote for leave, as there were for remain, and that voting one way or another does not imply or demand that a given individual supports everything the very many groups and individuals in either campaign did?
Don't try to be reasonable to a fanatic. Particularly when they reject anyone who does recant as asked, demonstrating that is not actually the goal, but a mere fig leaf
He asks that Leavers reach out to Remainers and their concerns as a way of making them engage with him. Then, when they do so, he personally accuses them of moral turpitude, and provokes then to respond to prove his point, usually by insulting their intelligence.
It’s a form of sport to him. If he’s consistently ignored he’ll soon get bored of it.
I make a direct point that none of the Leavers on here has even tried to answer: how do Leavers think they can condemn Jeremy Corbyn's complaisance towards anti-Semitism when they themselves have rallied behind a flag of xenophobic lies?
Sooner or later Leavers are going to realise that they cannot simply pretend that the manner of their victory is now history. It is going to contaminate British politics for decades and it is only going to get worse the longer Leavers try to ignore the problem.
Good grief.
A new highwater mark for wibble.
If you roll around in the gutter, you can't later get on your high horse. Leave showed that campaigning on hate and fear works. We can expect to see lots more of it from all sides. Leave supporters are in no position to complain about it.
Stage 1 is denial and stage 2 is anger - this fury - whilst mildy disturbing - suggests however that your glacial progress along the stages of grief is at last underway.
The 'stages of grief' bollocks is one of the most tedious and overdone memes on PB, among a very long list. Think of something less boring please.
Puts the Russians in a difficult situation. With the UK it was easy and tit for tat, simply expel the same number of diplomats. But to do that with almost the entire western world is to bite off your own nose to spite your own face. Quite humiliating.
Very impressive coordination.
Shows the power and determination of the West.
Next should be financial sanctions. Really turn the screw on those surrounding Putin's nasty regime.
That sort of coordination would have to be managed by the FCO and Downing Street working together - wouldn't it?
For someone like me who deeply despaired of May long before the worst election campaign in history and its troubled aftermath where the government seemed entirely without direction or purpose the last month or so has been thought provoking.
Is it possible that she just took quite a while to grow into the job? Its a big step up but on both Brexit and Salisbury she is considerably exceeding expectations.
She possibly is growing into the job, and perhaps being better advised, but as I've said in the past (to much derision), she's actually a reasonably good PM, in terms of managing the business of government. The opprobrium she has been getting over most of the last nine months was never justified.
Her failings are more on the political/presentational, not the governing, side of the job.
I would still like to see the government doing a lot more governing. It can still look obsessed with Brexit. There is an expressed desire to increase house building but so far very little results; there is little evidence of serious work going on in planning infrastructure or energy; the Student debt issue remains an untouched sore; we have run away from the problems of funding social care for an increasingly elderly population; there is too little focus on educational under attainment, as highlighted (yet again) by the north/south divide in the report this morning, I could go on and on.
But she has done really well in bringing and keeping the party together on a sensible way forward for Brexit and has done extremely well to build the sort of consensus that has built today's co-ordinated action. Just maybe she is finally getting a grip.
I imagine my joy at Palestinian suffering would have to be reeled in but could maybe be made up for by being more open about being happy about Israeli suffering, if I was an anti-semite.
There are two sides involved in the Israel-Palestine conflict that are different from us, the idea that supported one side excites racists and supporting the other doesn't is inaccurate. There are plenty of people who have a very negative view of Arabs. Although there are other people who are racist who like Israel for other reasons.
I wouldn't call it as clean cut as Brexit, where say if you did vote for racist reasons you would probably vote leave. There could be an argument for a racist remain vote on the basis that Brexit could increase non-EU immigration but it seems like a stretch to suggest many racists would have voted on that basis.
Which doesn't mean that Brexit or its supporters are all racist or the cause is somehow invalid. I've always (I'm pretty sure) avoided the racist leave idea except to make points elsewhere, as I'm doing now.
I don't doubt your equal opportunity desire for suffering or benediction one moment.
My point was that IF you were an antisemite, would Jezza's presence as leader of your Party embolden or inhibit you in expressing or not repressing or hinting at your antisemitic views?
I feel you sort of missed my hint there, as I understand both Palestinians and Israelis can be referred to as semites (although maybe I'm wrong here) so racism against either of them can be anti-semitism...
So my answer was, whichever the leader supported more, say Israel in the case of Blair, or Palestine in the case of Corbyn would allow me to feel freer to say my racism to the side my leader didn't support.
Ultimately, as with immigration or Brexit. I don't think it should matter what the racists want, good or bad. Although I would argue my side of the argument probably more often falls on the side more racists don't want, Brexit vs Remain, Trump vs Clinton and Conservatives vs Labour. I can't just dismiss the views of millions and millions of people who aren't racist though, even if in most cases it might help support my viewpoint.
Dismissing peoples legitimate concerns causes more trouble further down the line.
Ah yes sorry - as to _my_ point, how about if whenever I write "antisemitic" you replace it with "anti-Jewish"?
She was given a junior shadow role because she was one of the defeated candidates for the leadership in 2010. It was an attempt by Miliband to unify the party. Again not really an appointment on merit.
Yes, it goes on in politics all the time. In every party. There are debts to be paid, balances to be maintained.
But Abbott would never have risen to Shadow Cabinet level under any other leader than Corbyn. I would argue that their existing 'closeness' might have played a part in that rise.
Arguably Diane Abbott is the most senior and experienced MP of those who backed Corbyn and actually wanted him as leader. Not a massive surprise then that she should get a top position. If anything - I'm surprised she was 'only' given international development initially...
A large chunk of the western world appears to agree with the assessment of the evidence that Russia is the only plausible culprit in Salisbury.
It is gratifying that the use of chemical weapons garners a wide reaction. I suspect Putin is somewhat eyebrows raised and taken aback by the breadth of the action against Russia. The argument that he needs to be inserted in his box in a peaceful way is strong. I guess this is a first step.
This is an unhelpful development for Jeremy who is finding all his utterances over this contradicted by the Nations' allies from all over.
Combined with the outrageous insinuation by Jews that he may be Racist, I mean, how unimaginable that a member if the Labour party could be accused of Racism!
There is a lot of pretty accurate shovelling into the fan and the output isn't spreading, it's focussing on poor persecuted kind and honest Jezza.
Mr. Meeks, do you believe everyone who voted leave must necessarily endorse (or specifically recant) everything everyone who campaigned to leave did and said?
If not, then surely you'd accept there were various reasons to vote for leave, as there were for remain, and that voting one way or another does not imply or demand that a given individual supports everything the very many groups and individuals in either campaign did?
Don't try to be reasonable to a fanatic. Particularly when they reject anyone who does recant as asked, demonstrating that is not actually the goal, but a mere fig leaf
He asks that Leavers reach out to Remainers and their concerns as a way of making them engage with him. Then, when they do so, he personally accuses them of moral turpitude, and provokes then to respond to prove his point, usually by insulting their intelligence.
It’s a form of sport to him. If he’s consistently ignored he’ll soon get bored of it.
I make a direct point that none of the Leavers on here has even tried to answer: how do Leavers think they can condemn Jeremy Corbyn's complaisance towards anti-Semitism when they themselves have rallied behind a flag of xenophobic lies?
Sooner or later Leavers are going to realise that they cannot simply pretend that the manner of their victory is now history. It is going to contaminate British politics for decades and it is only going to get worse the longer Leavers try to ignore the problem.
Good grief.
A new highwater mark for wibble.
If you roll around in the gutter, you can't later get on your high horse. Leave showed that campaigning on hate and fear works. We can expect to see lots more of it from all sides. Leave supporters are in no position to complain about it.
Stage 1 is denial and stage 2 is anger - this fury - whilst mildy disturbing - suggests however that your glacial progress along the stages of grief is at last underway.
The 'stages of grief' bollocks is one of the most tedious and overdone memes on PB, among a very long list. Think of something less boring please.
She was given a junior shadow role because she was one of the defeated candidates for the leadership in 2010. It was an attempt by Miliband to unify the party. Again not really an appointment on merit.
Yes, it goes on in politics all the time. In every party. There are debts to be paid, balances to be maintained.
But Abbott would never have risen to Shadow Cabinet level under any other leader than Corbyn. I would argue that their existing 'closeness' might have played a part in that rise.
Arguably Diane Abbott is the most senior and experienced MP of those who backed Corbyn and actually wanted him as leader. Not a massive surprise then that she should get a top position. If anything - I'm surprised she was 'only' given international development initially...
Senior just means she has been around a long time. I would rather ability rather than length of service was a key factor in appointment to high office - irrespective of party.
Abbott's performance in the Shadow Cabinet roles she has had under Corbyn has been lacklustre most of the time and deeply embarrassing at others.
I don't doubt your equal opportunity desire for suffering or benediction one moment.
My point was that IF you were an antisemite, would Jezza's presence as leader of your Party embolden or inhibit you in expressing or not repressing or hinting at your antisemitic views?
I feel you sort of missed my hint there, as I understand both Palestinians and Israelis can be referred to as semites (although maybe I'm wrong here) so racism against either of them can be anti-semitism...
So my answer was, whichever the leader supported more, say Israel in the case of Blair, or Palestine in the case of Corbyn would allow me to feel freer to say my racism to the side my leader didn't support.
Ultimately, as with immigration or Brexit. I don't think it should matter what the racists want, good or bad. Although I would argue my side of the argument probably more often falls on the side more racists don't want, Brexit vs Remain, Trump vs Clinton and Conservatives vs Labour. I can't just dismiss the views of millions and millions of people who aren't racist though, even if in most cases it might help support my viewpoint.
Dismissing peoples legitimate concerns causes more trouble further down the line.
Ah yes sorry - as to _my_ point, how about if whenever I write "antisemitic" you replace it with "anti-Jewish"?
Does that make it clearer?
I think I pretty much answered it, it seems pretty clear in the last post. If you really want just that answer with nothing else around it and spelled out clearly (though I would like to know why) I'll oblige.
If I was anti-Jewish Jezza's Pro Palestinian rhetoric would embolden me, or at least be more likely to embolden me than say Blair's Pro Israeli rhetoric.
Comments
Trumps May.
https://twitter.com/laraseligman/status/978250327685201920
A new highwater mark for wibble.
https://twitter.com/tseofpb/status/978256891074826240?s=21
There are two sides involved in the Israel-Palestine conflict that are different from us, the idea that supported one side excites racists and supporting the other doesn't is inaccurate. There are plenty of people who have a very negative view of Arabs. Although there are other people who are racist who like Israel for other reasons.
I wouldn't call it as clean cut as Brexit, where say if you did vote for racist reasons you would probably vote leave. There could be an argument for a racist remain vote on the basis that Brexit could increase non-EU immigration but it seems like a stretch to suggest many racists would have voted on that basis.
Which doesn't mean that Brexit or its supporters are all racist or the cause is somehow invalid. I've always (I'm pretty sure) avoided the racist leave idea except to make points elsewhere, as I'm doing now.
The dire warnings about emergency budgets and economic collapse came from Remain. That was a campaign based on fear.
I appreciate that Leave was sold on a have-cake-and-eat-it basis, but you don't get to campaign on xenophobic lies and not have to deal with the consequences of campaigning on xenophobic lies.
No worries.
Maybe you can try again with either of the different points you were making...
One something to do with the PLP.
The other something to do with Corbyn having some responsibility for others actions and omissions.
Both something to do with anti-semitism....
Is it possible that she just took quite a while to grow into the job? Its a big step up but on both Brexit and Salisbury she is considerably exceeding expectations.
Look on the bright side. Once Brexit is done and dusted, you'll be able to breathe a sigh of relief that it was nowhere as bad as your lurid nightmares. You'll discover that it will be a breath of fresh air and you can console yourself that it seems like BINO compared to your wild imaginings.
No flesh-eating zombies coming for you, no gin-soaked harridans from your fevered imagination, and the sun will continue to shine. In a few short years, you'll be glad you agreed with Brexit after all.
It all starts with acknowledging the problem. From there, the boundaries of legitimate action in the future can be established.
Her failings are more on the political/presentational, not the governing, side of the job.
My point was that IF you were an antisemite, would Jezza's presence as leader of your Party embolden or inhibit you in expressing or not repressing or hinting at your antisemitic views?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/26/russian-trolls-attempted-manipulate-view-salisbury-poisoning/
We have far more in common than divides us.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-43542284
Whilst there should be public accountability for tragedies like this and I am in no way defending Southern Health for their failings.
But I fail to see what good comes from this sort of fine. It doesn't come out of the pockets of those individuals who were at fault. It is money taken away from front line health care.
I guess that money might get recycled into the NHS budget - but I doubt it.
It is right that justice is done and is seen to be done. It is right for people to be held accountable for their actions and/or failings.
But when it comes to this sort of case a huge fine only takes money away from those who need health care.
It doesn't take money away from shareholders or corporate fat cats. It isn't going to the families by way of compensation.
I don't see what it achieves under these circumstances. The necessary changes within Southern Health were under way anyway. This fine won't make those changes any easier to implement or improve things for those in their care.
Though the +1 bollox is just as tedious, I freely admit.
Yes, it goes on in politics all the time. In every party. There are debts to be paid, balances to be maintained.
But Abbott would never have risen to Shadow Cabinet level under any other leader than Corbyn. I would argue that their existing 'closeness' might have played a part in that rise.
Shows the power and determination of the West.
Next should be financial sanctions. Really turn the screw on those surrounding Putin's nasty regime.
https://electronicintifada.net/tags/naomi-wimborne-idrissi
I think her agenda is pretty clear. One might speculate why the BBC invited her on...
So my answer was, whichever the leader supported more, say Israel in the case of Blair, or Palestine in the case of Corbyn would allow me to feel freer to say my racism to the side my leader didn't support.
Ultimately, as with immigration or Brexit. I don't think it should matter what the racists want, good or bad. Although I would argue my side of the argument probably more often falls on the side more racists don't want, Brexit vs Remain, Trump vs Clinton and Conservatives vs Labour. I can't just dismiss the views of millions and millions of people who aren't racist though, even if in most cases it might help support my viewpoint.
Dismissing peoples legitimate concerns causes more trouble further down the line.
But she has done really well in bringing and keeping the party together on a sensible way forward for Brexit and has done extremely well to build the sort of consensus that has built today's co-ordinated action. Just maybe she is finally getting a grip.
Does that make it clearer?
A large chunk of the western world appears to agree with the assessment of the evidence that Russia is the only plausible culprit in Salisbury.
It is gratifying that the use of chemical weapons garners a wide reaction. I suspect Putin is somewhat eyebrows raised and taken aback by the breadth of the action against Russia. The argument that he needs to be inserted in his box in a peaceful way is strong. I guess this is a first step.
This is an unhelpful development for Jeremy who is finding all his utterances over this contradicted by the Nations' allies from all over.
Combined with the outrageous insinuation by Jews that he may be Racist, I mean, how unimaginable that a member if the Labour party could be accused of Racism!
There is a lot of pretty accurate shovelling into the fan and the output isn't spreading, it's focussing on poor persecuted kind and honest Jezza.
Abbott's performance in the Shadow Cabinet roles she has had under Corbyn has been lacklustre most of the time and deeply embarrassing at others.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2017/may/02/diane-abbotts-error-filled-lbc-interview-on-police-funding-video
If I was anti-Jewish Jezza's Pro Palestinian rhetoric would embolden me, or at least be more likely to embolden me than say Blair's Pro Israeli rhetoric.