| Not antisemitic 07:26 - Sep 23 with 19946 views | GlasgowBlue |
So the Labour Party conference has started and there’s absolutely no sign of antisemitism on day one. None at all.
[Post edited 23 Sep 2019 7:32]
|  |
| |  |
| Not antisemitic on 14:08 - Sep 23 with 1435 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Not antisemitic on 09:28 - Sep 23 by monytowbray |
One I agree with and it is pretty f*cked.
Two I can't see the anti-Jewish conspiracies, what points specifically are?
Three I'm still baffled how you can't see why people take issue with the Israeli government and those who fund it. It's not a black and white matter at all from either side but you can't just say anyone who speaks out against it is an anti-semite surely?
Four I can't watch the video as I'm at work. So I'll have to do that later.
Five is a bit odd I will admit. Doesn't look like an official part of the agenda though. [Post edited 23 Sep 2019 9:29]
|
Glad we can all agree with No 1 as Jezza has now come out to condemn it
Although he's telling porkies about who asked the police to remove it. It was actually a Jewish org who complained to the police.
No 2. The leaflet was produced by a holocaust revisionist who also happened to be the bloke who put up the poster. The conspiracies are that a Jewish group (JLM) affiliated to the Labour party are engaged in a plot to remove Corbyn as leader. The leaflet accuses a minority community who have been on the end of vile antisemitic abuse from Labour party members of "faking" the antisemitism they have been subjected to and conspiring with Israeli agents (an age old duel loyalty trope that is deeply antisemitic).
No 3.It calls Israel a racist endeavour. That directly contravenes the IHRA definition of antisemitism. It doesn't mean that the policies of the Israeli government are racist. They are. It means the very existence if Israel is a racist endeavour. It denies the Jewish people the right to self determination.
No 4. A Jewish delegate is clearly heckled by several people for calling out racism against his community.
No 5. These are the very people that share Corbyn's politics. The things they were suspended and expelled for are what Corbyn used to say before becoming leader.
Hope all of the above helps. | |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 14:14 - Sep 23 with 1420 views | itfcjoe |
| Not antisemitic on 14:08 - Sep 23 by GlasgowBlue |
Glad we can all agree with No 1 as Jezza has now come out to condemn it
Although he's telling porkies about who asked the police to remove it. It was actually a Jewish org who complained to the police.
No 2. The leaflet was produced by a holocaust revisionist who also happened to be the bloke who put up the poster. The conspiracies are that a Jewish group (JLM) affiliated to the Labour party are engaged in a plot to remove Corbyn as leader. The leaflet accuses a minority community who have been on the end of vile antisemitic abuse from Labour party members of "faking" the antisemitism they have been subjected to and conspiring with Israeli agents (an age old duel loyalty trope that is deeply antisemitic).
No 3.It calls Israel a racist endeavour. That directly contravenes the IHRA definition of antisemitism. It doesn't mean that the policies of the Israeli government are racist. They are. It means the very existence if Israel is a racist endeavour. It denies the Jewish people the right to self determination.
No 4. A Jewish delegate is clearly heckled by several people for calling out racism against his community.
No 5. These are the very people that share Corbyn's politics. The things they were suspended and expelled for are what Corbyn used to say before becoming leader.
Hope all of the above helps. |
4 - I listened to this and don't hear any of the heckling or booing, is there an alternate feed which shows this? |  |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 14:18 - Sep 23 with 1409 views | Darth_Koont |
| Not antisemitic on 14:08 - Sep 23 by GlasgowBlue |
Glad we can all agree with No 1 as Jezza has now come out to condemn it
Although he's telling porkies about who asked the police to remove it. It was actually a Jewish org who complained to the police.
No 2. The leaflet was produced by a holocaust revisionist who also happened to be the bloke who put up the poster. The conspiracies are that a Jewish group (JLM) affiliated to the Labour party are engaged in a plot to remove Corbyn as leader. The leaflet accuses a minority community who have been on the end of vile antisemitic abuse from Labour party members of "faking" the antisemitism they have been subjected to and conspiring with Israeli agents (an age old duel loyalty trope that is deeply antisemitic).
No 3.It calls Israel a racist endeavour. That directly contravenes the IHRA definition of antisemitism. It doesn't mean that the policies of the Israeli government are racist. They are. It means the very existence if Israel is a racist endeavour. It denies the Jewish people the right to self determination.
No 4. A Jewish delegate is clearly heckled by several people for calling out racism against his community.
No 5. These are the very people that share Corbyn's politics. The things they were suspended and expelled for are what Corbyn used to say before becoming leader.
Hope all of the above helps. |
This is where you end up when you're too apologetic about accusations of antisemitism.
It's not antisemitic. And certainly not disgusting. |  |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 14:29 - Sep 23 with 1398 views | GlasgowBlue |
Further context. This is the man who produced both the flyer and put up the poster.
Are there still decent people willing to excuse this and deny that it is any way antisemitic? | |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 14:36 - Sep 23 with 1380 views | Darth_Koont |
| Not antisemitic on 14:29 - Sep 23 by GlasgowBlue |
Further context. This is the man who produced both the flyer and put up the poster.
Are there still decent people willing to excuse this and deny that it is any way antisemitic? |
I'm not excusing people for their actions but whether certain statements are antisemitic.
You yourself have agreed that there is an Israel lobby and asked what the problem was with that. Nothing, until someone accuses you of being antisemitic for just mentioning it.
Forget your supporting "evidence" that's just other stuff, what's actually antisemitic about the cartoon in question? | |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 14:44 - Sep 23 with 1364 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Not antisemitic on 14:36 - Sep 23 by Darth_Koont |
I'm not excusing people for their actions but whether certain statements are antisemitic.
You yourself have agreed that there is an Israel lobby and asked what the problem was with that. Nothing, until someone accuses you of being antisemitic for just mentioning it.
Forget your supporting "evidence" that's just other stuff, what's actually antisemitic about the cartoon in question? |
The poster suggests that accusations of antisemitism in Labour are being created by the Israeli lobby. | |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 14:49 - Sep 23 with 1357 views | Darth_Koont |
| Not antisemitic on 14:44 - Sep 23 by GlasgowBlue |
The poster suggests that accusations of antisemitism in Labour are being created by the Israeli lobby. |
Some of them have been created, yes, but that's not the issue. It's that the campaign to amplify the accusations and get them to stick to Corbyn has definitely been led by what you called the Israel lobby, with the Israeli government through the embassy very much involved. | |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 14:56 - Sep 23 with 1343 views | Wacko |
| Not antisemitic on 14:08 - Sep 23 by GlasgowBlue |
Glad we can all agree with No 1 as Jezza has now come out to condemn it
Although he's telling porkies about who asked the police to remove it. It was actually a Jewish org who complained to the police.
No 2. The leaflet was produced by a holocaust revisionist who also happened to be the bloke who put up the poster. The conspiracies are that a Jewish group (JLM) affiliated to the Labour party are engaged in a plot to remove Corbyn as leader. The leaflet accuses a minority community who have been on the end of vile antisemitic abuse from Labour party members of "faking" the antisemitism they have been subjected to and conspiring with Israeli agents (an age old duel loyalty trope that is deeply antisemitic).
No 3.It calls Israel a racist endeavour. That directly contravenes the IHRA definition of antisemitism. It doesn't mean that the policies of the Israeli government are racist. They are. It means the very existence if Israel is a racist endeavour. It denies the Jewish people the right to self determination.
No 4. A Jewish delegate is clearly heckled by several people for calling out racism against his community.
No 5. These are the very people that share Corbyn's politics. The things they were suspended and expelled for are what Corbyn used to say before becoming leader.
Hope all of the above helps. |
You still haven't addressed all your arguments with relation to the IHRA definition and examples. If you can't, then they're not antisemitic, by your own assertion. It's strange to mention it in a condescending post and then run away from it when challenged.
The one thing you're hanging your hat on is an example within an example, which is frankly contestable. Logic does not dictate that if you call something racist, you are denying that entity's right to self-determination.
An example: England colonised Scotland and - no doubt - treated the native population very badly indeed. A change of regime over many years has seen the Scots given their own right to self-determination (to a certain extent, granted, but within a union called Britain, not a nation called England), and the racism / suppression towards them greatly if not totally diminished. Calling the English originally racist, and then implementing a regime that diminishes said racism in no way affects England's own right to self-determination. Of course, both examples are complex and different in their own ways, but advocating the right of self-determination of two groups of people is surely more humane and reasonable than advocating that of only one group. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Not antisemitic on 15:03 - Sep 23 with 1336 views | Wacko |
| Not antisemitic on 14:49 - Sep 23 by Darth_Koont |
Some of them have been created, yes, but that's not the issue. It's that the campaign to amplify the accusations and get them to stick to Corbyn has definitely been led by what you called the Israel lobby, with the Israeli government through the embassy very much involved. |
Don't get caught up on his whataboutery.
Accusing someone of politicking / capitalising on antisemitism is not in itself antisemitic | |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 15:09 - Sep 23 with 1327 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Not antisemitic on 09:40 - Sep 23 by GlasgowBlue |
Oh Banksy.
Do we have to do the same dance every time? I call out antisemitism in the Labour Party. You say I never call out racism in the Tory Party. I give an examples of where I’ve called out racism in the Tory party. You then say that I post about antisemitism more than any other type of racis and claim I don’t care about other forms of racism. I then post several examples of where I’ve called out other forms of racism but admit to posting about antisemitism more because of my family background. I explain my wife’s ethnicity and my own heritage. You then say “a-ha! So you do prioritise the racism you complain about”. I ask you whether you would constantly question a man of Afro Caribbean heritage who has a wife of mixed race why they are more concerned with the Windrush scandal or black lives matter. You suddenly go quiet. Eat sleep rave repeat.
So just bookmark the above paragraph to save us both the time and effort. [Post edited 23 Sep 2019 9:43]
|
Well that was a thoroughly bizarre tangent! |  |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 15:14 - Sep 23 with 1316 views | wkj |
| Not antisemitic on 15:09 - Sep 23 by BanksterDebtSlave |
Well that was a thoroughly bizarre tangent! |
 |  |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 15:17 - Sep 23 with 1309 views | Darth_Koont |
| Not antisemitic on 15:03 - Sep 23 by Wacko |
Don't get caught up on his whataboutery.
Accusing someone of politicking / capitalising on antisemitism is not in itself antisemitic |
Absolutely.
But here it’s a bit more specific. GB said himself there’s an Israel lobby (which we both agreed was fine) but he and others go notably silent on any evidence of how they act and whether that influence is actual interference. Then they just repeat the original accusation of antisemitism to shut it down.
Some might call that disingenuous, intellectually dishonest and scummy politicking. | |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 15:18 - Sep 23 with 1304 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Not antisemitic on 14:29 - Sep 23 by GlasgowBlue |
Further context. This is the man who produced both the flyer and put up the poster.
Are there still decent people willing to excuse this and deny that it is any way antisemitic? |
Yep that cartoon isn't antisemitic. | |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 15:19 - Sep 23 with 1299 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Not antisemitic on 14:44 - Sep 23 by GlasgowBlue |
The poster suggests that accusations of antisemitism in Labour are being created by the Israeli lobby. |
'Suggests'.....'implies'.....here we go! | |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 15:22 - Sep 23 with 1291 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Not antisemitic on 14:14 - Sep 23 by itfcjoe |
4 - I listened to this and don't hear any of the heckling or booing, is there an alternate feed which shows this? |
No there isn't Joe... I am not convinced he listened to it before posting it! | |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 16:23 - Sep 23 with 1254 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Not antisemitic on 14:56 - Sep 23 by Wacko |
You still haven't addressed all your arguments with relation to the IHRA definition and examples. If you can't, then they're not antisemitic, by your own assertion. It's strange to mention it in a condescending post and then run away from it when challenged.
The one thing you're hanging your hat on is an example within an example, which is frankly contestable. Logic does not dictate that if you call something racist, you are denying that entity's right to self-determination.
An example: England colonised Scotland and - no doubt - treated the native population very badly indeed. A change of regime over many years has seen the Scots given their own right to self-determination (to a certain extent, granted, but within a union called Britain, not a nation called England), and the racism / suppression towards them greatly if not totally diminished. Calling the English originally racist, and then implementing a regime that diminishes said racism in no way affects England's own right to self-determination. Of course, both examples are complex and different in their own ways, but advocating the right of self-determination of two groups of people is surely more humane and reasonable than advocating that of only one group. |
I’ve clearly set out why not just I, but representatives of the Jewish community believe these examples over the weekend were antisemitic.
And I’m sorry zed but you are not in a position to decide what examples in the IHRA definition are contestable. The definition is the definition. You can’t lick and choose the bits you disagree with.
Your last paragraph is just word soup. [Post edited 23 Sep 2019 16:24]
| |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 16:27 - Sep 23 with 1242 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Not antisemitic on 15:19 - Sep 23 by BanksterDebtSlave |
'Suggests'.....'implies'.....here we go! |
So you disagree with Corbyn that the poster was antisemitic? | |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 16:38 - Sep 23 with 1233 views | Darth_Koont |
| Not antisemitic on 16:23 - Sep 23 by GlasgowBlue |
I’ve clearly set out why not just I, but representatives of the Jewish community believe these examples over the weekend were antisemitic.
And I’m sorry zed but you are not in a position to decide what examples in the IHRA definition are contestable. The definition is the definition. You can’t lick and choose the bits you disagree with.
Your last paragraph is just word soup. [Post edited 23 Sep 2019 16:24]
|
Stop dodging. | |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 16:50 - Sep 23 with 1228 views | Wacko |
| Not antisemitic on 16:23 - Sep 23 by GlasgowBlue |
I’ve clearly set out why not just I, but representatives of the Jewish community believe these examples over the weekend were antisemitic.
And I’m sorry zed but you are not in a position to decide what examples in the IHRA definition are contestable. The definition is the definition. You can’t lick and choose the bits you disagree with.
Your last paragraph is just word soup. [Post edited 23 Sep 2019 16:24]
|
I've accepted that number 3 corresponds - in some part - to an example given by IHRA and therefore constitutes, in their eyes, as antisemitic. I have every right to contest it, backing up my argument by using a similar example of a colonialist power overcoming a native population. Whether you understand my 'word soup' or not.
For the others, you've done nothing of the sort.
Associated content, accusations of faking, heckling, and past misdemeanours are not examples mentioned in the IHRA's definition of antisemitism (nor its examples), so I'm asking you to remove those 4 examples which you claim are antisemitic. Whether you or others 'believe' them to be or not is irrelevant.
Then we can all get on with making the world a better place [Post edited 23 Sep 2019 16:50]
| |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 18:19 - Sep 23 with 1179 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Not antisemitic on 16:50 - Sep 23 by Wacko |
I've accepted that number 3 corresponds - in some part - to an example given by IHRA and therefore constitutes, in their eyes, as antisemitic. I have every right to contest it, backing up my argument by using a similar example of a colonialist power overcoming a native population. Whether you understand my 'word soup' or not.
For the others, you've done nothing of the sort.
Associated content, accusations of faking, heckling, and past misdemeanours are not examples mentioned in the IHRA's definition of antisemitism (nor its examples), so I'm asking you to remove those 4 examples which you claim are antisemitic. Whether you or others 'believe' them to be or not is irrelevant.
Then we can all get on with making the world a better place [Post edited 23 Sep 2019 16:50]
|
The IHRA definition is accepted by all democratic western governments, the majority of UK local authorities and the CPS, so you can contest all you want but the McPherson principle says that the minority gets to define the racism that is used against them.
Now I have clearly set out why I believe the 5 links I posted this morning were antisemitic in a reply to Callis. You either lack the ability or the willingness to read what was posted.
I don't intend to waste much more time on you so I'll set it out one last time.
1. Labour is currently under a statutory investigation by the EHRC for "unlawfully discriminating against, harassed or victimised people because they are Jewish". The complaints against Labour antisemitism has been driven by bodies who are representative of the majority of British Jews (The BOD) or Jewish Labour members (The JLM). The poster suggests that accusations of antisemitism in Labour are being created by the Israeli lobby.
The IHRA definition says it is antisemitic to accuse Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
Even Jeremy Corbyn has come out and said that the poster was antisemitic.
Hilariously, the antisemitic cartoonist has got the hump with Corbyn which has lead to one of Jezza's outrider to accuse the cartoonist of working for "Israeli Secret Services". You couldn't make this sh1t up.
2. The leaflet was produced by a holocaust revisionist who also happened to be the bloke who put up the poster. The conspiracies are that a Jewish group (JLM) affiliated to the Labour party are engaged in a plot to remove Corbyn as leader. The leaflet accuses a minority community who have been on the end of vile antisemitic abuse from Labour party members of "faking" the antisemitism they have been subjected to and conspiring with Israeli agents (an age old duel loyalty trope that is deeply antisemitic).
So again this one falls under the example of accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
3. It calls Israel a racist endeavour. That directly contravenes the IHRA definition of antisemitism. Yes I know you want to contest that. But you don't get to. The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance does.
4. A Jewish delegate is clearly heckled by several people for calling out racism against his community. At 0.40, 1.34. Why do you think Mike Katz says "no matter what you think and what you shout"?
If any other minority was stood on a stage complaining about racism against their community and he or she was heckled, it would be quite rightly be condemned as racist. Are you suggesting Jews deserve less than any other minority community?
5. The 4 speakers at the fringe meeting have been suspended or expelled from the Labour party for antisemitism. If the Tory party held a fringe meeting featuring 4 former members expelled for racism it would quite rightly be called a racist meeting.
You may agree or disagree with what I've posted but don't be so bloody silly as to demand I remove my op. [Post edited 23 Sep 2019 18:46]
| |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 18:22 - Sep 23 with 1171 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Not antisemitic on 16:38 - Sep 23 by Darth_Koont |
Stop dodging. |
Stop defending racism. | |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 18:26 - Sep 23 with 1164 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Not antisemitic on 16:27 - Sep 23 by GlasgowBlue |
So you disagree with Corbyn that the poster was antisemitic? |
If he said that yes...I disagree with him on lots. | |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 18:33 - Sep 23 with 1160 views | footers |
| Not antisemitic on 18:19 - Sep 23 by GlasgowBlue |
The IHRA definition is accepted by all democratic western governments, the majority of UK local authorities and the CPS, so you can contest all you want but the McPherson principle says that the minority gets to define the racism that is used against them.
Now I have clearly set out why I believe the 5 links I posted this morning were antisemitic in a reply to Callis. You either lack the ability or the willingness to read what was posted.
I don't intend to waste much more time on you so I'll set it out one last time.
1. Labour is currently under a statutory investigation by the EHRC for "unlawfully discriminating against, harassed or victimised people because they are Jewish". The complaints against Labour antisemitism has been driven by bodies who are representative of the majority of British Jews (The BOD) or Jewish Labour members (The JLM). The poster suggests that accusations of antisemitism in Labour are being created by the Israeli lobby.
The IHRA definition says it is antisemitic to accuse Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
Even Jeremy Corbyn has come out and said that the poster was antisemitic.
Hilariously, the antisemitic cartoonist has got the hump with Corbyn which has lead to one of Jezza's outrider to accuse the cartoonist of working for "Israeli Secret Services". You couldn't make this sh1t up.
2. The leaflet was produced by a holocaust revisionist who also happened to be the bloke who put up the poster. The conspiracies are that a Jewish group (JLM) affiliated to the Labour party are engaged in a plot to remove Corbyn as leader. The leaflet accuses a minority community who have been on the end of vile antisemitic abuse from Labour party members of "faking" the antisemitism they have been subjected to and conspiring with Israeli agents (an age old duel loyalty trope that is deeply antisemitic).
So again this one falls under the example of accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
3. It calls Israel a racist endeavour. That directly contravenes the IHRA definition of antisemitism. Yes I know you want to contest that. But you don't get to. The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance does.
4. A Jewish delegate is clearly heckled by several people for calling out racism against his community. At 0.40, 1.34. Why do you think Mike Katz says "no matter what you think and what you shout"?
If any other minority was stood on a stage complaining about racism against their community and he or she was heckled, it would be quite rightly be condemned as racist. Are you suggesting Jews deserve less than any other minority community?
5. The 4 speakers at the fringe meeting have been suspended or expelled from the Labour party for antisemitism. If the Tory party held a fringe meeting featuring 4 former members expelled for racism it would quite rightly be called a racist meeting.
You may agree or disagree with what I've posted but don't be so bloody silly as to demand I remove my op. [Post edited 23 Sep 2019 18:46]
|
Been a busy day on Twitter, huh. |  |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 18:39 - Sep 23 with 1155 views | Darth_Koont |
| Not antisemitic on 18:22 - Sep 23 by GlasgowBlue |
Stop defending racism. |
Where?
You have been asked to point out the racism using IHRA and you've dodged it. Instead you bring in something else or some appeal to authority fallacy that doesn't answer it either.
To your credit, you're actually doing a very good job of showing how the IHRA definition doesn't let you call any of this antisemitism. Except perhaps the Jewish Machover's deliberately provocative but not invalid criticism of Israel and what it has become. | |
| |
| Not antisemitic on 18:49 - Sep 23 with 1140 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Not antisemitic on 18:39 - Sep 23 by Darth_Koont |
Where?
You have been asked to point out the racism using IHRA and you've dodged it. Instead you bring in something else or some appeal to authority fallacy that doesn't answer it either.
To your credit, you're actually doing a very good job of showing how the IHRA definition doesn't let you call any of this antisemitism. Except perhaps the Jewish Machover's deliberately provocative but not invalid criticism of Israel and what it has become. |
I did so in reply to Callis at 14.08. You even replied to that post at 14.18. There are none so blind as those who will not see. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
