By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Tuesday evening the area around ‘Ben and Jerrys’ in central Brighton will become a ‘judenfrei’ zone. A place for all the antisemites to meet before scuttling of to see their favourite Jew haters. Sickening. pic.twitter.com/qktWoaHSkg
So our “take home” from this is that the Leader of the Opposition just does what his advisors tell him to do?
I don't know what he was advised, but it seems reasonable. And it's one instance, so no evidence at all that "the Leader of the Opposition just does what his advisors tell him to do."
People do often follow what advisors advise. Otherwise there'd be no point having advisors.
Either way, your claim of game set and match seems to not be the case. New balls please.
I don't know what he was advised, but it seems reasonable. And it's one instance, so no evidence at all that "the Leader of the Opposition just does what his advisors tell him to do."
People do often follow what advisors advise. Otherwise there'd be no point having advisors.
Either way, your claim of game set and match seems to not be the case. New balls please.
So basically you’re saying everything the Leader of the Opposition says is gospel unless it counters your point of view when it must be because an Advisor told him to say it.
I imagine Corbyn's been advised to say that. Because of people like you twisting it. Like others in the thread I disagree with him.
Every one of your examples has been pulled apart as false (by posters more knowledgable than me).
The video... I've just watched it. Can't hear any booing.
There are plenty of examples of anti semitism (which you've highlighted before and are disgusting). Making them up just weakens your argument.
This is how GB rolls as we all know, the other week he was going on about how Iran wants a "Jew free Middle East" and when he got rumbled he scarpered like a good'un only to pop up later to continue to push his agenda as he always does.
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.
1) Corbyn describes cartoon by extreme anti-Israel cartoonist Carlos Latuff, drawn to defend him, as "disgusting"
2) Latuff attacks Corbyn for saying this
3) Corbynite suggests Latuff might be working for "Israeli Secret Services" because he attacked Corbyn
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]
Late to the party as I've been out on the bubbly with my comrades. Darth_Koont aptly took over taking you to task since you're now squeezing out tenuous links to the IHRA definition (which, no, you didn't refer to in your reply to Callis). I think there's a glaring misinterpretation of the only other example you reference, between ALL Jewish citizens and SOME Jewish citizens. Plus the contradictory part: 'criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic', which I keep repeating and you keep ignoring. And in 3 I'm contesting the logic only, which is plain to see, and not a matter of interpretation. In that nowhere does the article seek to deny the Jewish people their right to self-determination, especially since it's coming from an Israeli Jew.
I just want to add: you may feel you have 'wasted time' on me but I see it as time spent hopefully learning a lesson that it is not right to post allegations without backing them up with evidence. Your flippant patronising reply and that of your disciple this morning was the biggest factor in me (and I guess the others) spending an entire day to get you to justify your comments (which you still haven't done completely, based on your own framework). The truth is, you have no idea what I personally agree or disagree with you about since I've been careful not to put any of my beliefs into my posts. The only thing I've shown to disagree is your poor arguing skills, which, if I'm allowed a parting shot, is just as much, if not more, '6th-former' than anyone else on this forum.
So basically you’re saying everything the Leader of the Opposition says is gospel unless it counters your point of view when it must be because an Advisor told him to say it.
This is how GB rolls as we all know, the other week he was going on about how Iran wants a "Jew free Middle East" and when he got rumbled he scarpered like a good'un only to pop up later to continue to push his agenda as he always does.
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]
Does make me laugh how anyone a bit more disparaging but more clued-up than you is instantly called Zed.
To be fair, when you're not running away you're often attacking the man.
Hate Not Hate attended no 5 as part of their work tracking antisemitism on the left.
The “Labour Against the Witchhunt†group held a rally outside Labour conference this evening. Attendees were asked to rendezvous outside a Ben and Jerry’s before being walked to the secret venue. We attended as part of our work to track antisemitism on the left. pic.twitter.com/kFmj2Sqwcw
Two cartoons deemed by the Guardia to be too antisemitic to publish were raffled off at a Labour Representation Committee event on Monday. The president of the organisation is John McDonnell.
And this anecdote from the Guardian’s Jonathan Freedland
I was talking on a street corner to @SadiqKhan. Two Labour Party members - white, middle-aged - approached him. They wanted to know why he’d attended the previous day’s @JewishLabour event.
Hate Not Hate attended no 5 as part of their work tracking antisemitism on the left.
The “Labour Against the Witchhunt†group held a rally outside Labour conference this evening. Attendees were asked to rendezvous outside a Ben and Jerry’s before being walked to the secret venue. We attended as part of our work to track antisemitism on the left. pic.twitter.com/kFmj2Sqwcw
Two cartoons deemed by the Guardia to be too antisemitic to publish were raffled off at a Labour Representation Committee event on Monday. The president of the organisation is John McDonnell.
And this anecdote from the Guardian’s Jonathan Freedland
I was talking on a street corner to @SadiqKhan. Two Labour Party members - white, middle-aged - approached him. They wanted to know why he’d attended the previous day’s @JewishLabour event.
I like how several people have pulled apart his OP (and not just us usual suspects, even people like Joe said they couldn't hear any booing) yet Glassers just brushes that aside and keeps going.
This is how smear campaigns work. Just keep posting volume... even if stuff takes mental gymnastics and is tenuous at best... the more you do the more the narrative will be reinforced.
We're in an age where hard facts aren't that important anymore.
I like how several people have pulled apart his OP (and not just us usual suspects, even people like Joe said they couldn't hear any booing) yet Glassers just brushes that aside and keeps going.
This is how smear campaigns work. Just keep posting volume... even if stuff takes mental gymnastics and is tenuous at best... the more you do the more the narrative will be reinforced.
We're in an age where hard facts aren't that important anymore.
The matter has been concluded.
Let us all go our different ways in brotherly love.
Peace, peace at last.
footers KC - Prosecution Barrister - Friend to all
Hate Not Hate attended no 5 as part of their work tracking antisemitism on the left.
The “Labour Against the Witchhunt†group held a rally outside Labour conference this evening. Attendees were asked to rendezvous outside a Ben and Jerry’s before being walked to the secret venue. We attended as part of our work to track antisemitism on the left. pic.twitter.com/kFmj2Sqwcw
Two cartoons deemed by the Guardia to be too antisemitic to publish were raffled off at a Labour Representation Committee event on Monday. The president of the organisation is John McDonnell.
And this anecdote from the Guardian’s Jonathan Freedland
I was talking on a street corner to @SadiqKhan. Two Labour Party members - white, middle-aged - approached him. They wanted to know why he’d attended the previous day’s @JewishLabour event.
In conclusion: Take a step back and breathe in the parallels with the UK.
He's got a John Oliver-style of delivery that you either love or hate but still worth watching for the underlying evidence of how misrepresented and targeted the Israeli critics are.
If you believe that conversation with Sadiq Khan took place, its pretty ugly, no?
Why do you think it's ugly?
If they're criticising Khan for meeting Jews then that's clearly antisemitic. If they're criticising Khan for going to a meeting of a group that is hardcore pro-Israel and Zionist by its own admission, and has had a dubious part to play in amplifying and distorting antisemitism within Labour, then that's clearly not antisemitic.
The JLM are not above criticism because they aren't "the Jewish people in Labour" as much as they like to pretend they are. There are many Jews in Labour who would criticize Khan for meeting them as well.
If they're criticising Khan for meeting Jews then that's clearly antisemitic. If they're criticising Khan for going to a meeting of a group that is hardcore pro-Israel and Zionist by its own admission, and has had a dubious part to play in amplifying and distorting antisemitism within Labour, then that's clearly not antisemitic.
The JLM are not above criticism because they aren't "the Jewish people in Labour" as much as they like to pretend they are. There are many Jews in Labour who would criticize Khan for meeting them as well.
It’s always the wrong kind of Jews with you isn’t it? Always throwing in the loyal to Israel trope for good measure. But that it’s antisemitic. No sir. Just legitimate criticism of Israel. Of course it is.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
