Quick reminder that British Jews categorically don’t agree, and really they are the ones who ought to know.
Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)
- Thread starter unchanged_lineup
- Start date
Quick reminder that British Jews categorically don’t agree, and really they are the ones who ought to know.
You've asked all of them, well fair play that must of took you some time.
And nobody says you can't criticise Israel. He's been busy.
Yeah you’re not going to be very good at this.
I think when the major Jewish papers, all the key religious leaders, many high profile Jewish journos, MPs and other similar community leaders all get together and say the same frigging thing within a few days of each other, then maybe just maybe you ought to do them the courtesy of listening rather than try to take weak pot shots.
I think that is an interpretation that would suit you. You’d love this to be about silencing criticism of Israel because hey, that is somehing a corbynite could really get self righteous about, and we all know how much they get off on that, but it is not. It is about using Israel as a stick to beat Jews with.
That 'nobody is saying you can't criticise Israel' lasted long then.
Huh?
Nobody is saying that you can’t criticise Israel. But certain kinds of criticism, those which are really just sticks to beat Jews with, are clearly antisemitic and should be recognised as such. Thats what the Jewish papers were saying.
However many in the Labour Party seem to think this is about Jews saying you can’t criticise Israel, and who knows, maybe that suits their own sense of self righteousness (or who knows, latent anti Jewish prejudice) to believe that. But that to me is a basic misunderstanding of the argument being made.
So no, nobody is saying you can’t criticise Israel although some people don’t want to accept that.
You can say that you can criticise Israel without being antisemitic but the only oxygen their argument has relies on them hearing you saying you can't criticise Israel without being antisemitic. So no matter how many times you say that you can criticise Israel without being antisemitic they hear "You can't criticise Israel without being antisemitic'
Hopefully someone can let these people know that it isn't about stifling criticism of Israel.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/27/antisemitism-ihra-definition-jewish-writers
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/27/antisemitism-ihra-definition-jewish-writers
What consultations with the Jewish community did the Labour party carry out when deciding to redact articles from the IHRA definition of antisemitism?
Is there going to be a another Shami-sham in which she 'independently investigates' the conduct of the party led by a man upon whom she relies on for a job and finds that there's absolutely noting untoward to see here, again?
Is there going to be a another Shami-sham in which she 'independently investigates' the conduct of the party led by a man upon whom she relies on for a job and finds that there's absolutely noting untoward to see here, again?
this didn't happen
It did.
Apart from all the recommendations she made about what needed to change because there was plenty untoward to see, obviously.
Yet you appear to have submitted the article for consideration as if you genuinely think it's full of opinion that the IHRA was flawed because everyone agrees it meant you can't criticise Israel, whereas in fact two authors made the point that the IHRA allows for criticism of Israel.
Now do the others featured.
Also, please don't try and read my mind and tell me what I 'genuinely think', you struggle to avoid contradicting yourself without moving your talents on to others.
The reaction from the major jewish paper is laughable ''Corbyn poses 'existential threat'' is up there with Corbyn will turn the country into red flag waving trotskyists
The Jewish Board of deputies for example
Yeah clamming jews who disagree are anti semitic isn't a good look is it. The Board Of deputies also blamed Hamas in regards to the recent event of Israel murdering Palestine protestors. Which caused hundred of jews to sign petition going against the Board Of Deputies, do these not count then ?
http://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com...-criticising-board-of-deputies-gaza-response/
Yeah clamming jews who disagree are anti semitic isn't a good look is it. The Board Of deputies also blamed Hamas in regards to the recent event of Israel murdering Palestine protestors. Which caused hundred of jews to sign petition going against the Board Of Deputies, do these not count then ?
http://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com...-criticising-board-of-deputies-gaza-response/
I'm not what your point is here. Just because their high profile journos doesn't mean the view is worth more to listen than any other jew.
But even with that said Stephen Pollard editor of the jewish chronicle who very critical of the labour party is also a man who seems to have a bit of a liking for Farge when he's attacking muslims and in fact Pollard and the far right paper the Spectator had to issue a apology and pay damages after referring to a Islam Expo as a racist, fascist and genocidal organisation (https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/2...d-apologise-to-islam-expo-and-pay-damages/)so hardly someone with a calm look on things. This far right nationalist poltics
But even with that said Stephen Pollard editor of the jewish chronicle who very critical of the labour party is also a man who seems to have a bit of a liking for Farge when he's attacking muslims and in fact Pollard and the far right paper the Spectator had to issue a apology and pay damages after referring to a Islam Expo as a racist, fascist and genocidal organisation (https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/2...d-apologise-to-islam-expo-and-pay-damages/)so hardly someone with a calm look on things. This far right nationalist poltics
A MP like Margaret Hodge ? Of course Hodge would know racism where she see it like the time where she called for ''migrant housing rethink''
https://www.patreon.com/posts/20193104
Or maybe your talking about someone like disgraced MP John Woodcock
https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...eder-guido-fawkes-john-woodcock-a8286856.html
Ah the old their not the correct sort of jew argument which of course is deeply anti semitic. And again these ''concerns'' are coming from people on the quite right wing of politics, maybe just maybe there actually no concern of fighting forms of racism from these people.
https://www.patreon.com/posts/20193104
Or maybe your talking about someone like disgraced MP John Woodcock
https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...eder-guido-fawkes-john-woodcock-a8286856.html
Ah the old their not the correct sort of jew argument which of course is deeply anti semitic. And again these ''concerns'' are coming from people on the quite right wing of politics, maybe just maybe there actually no concern of fighting forms of racism from these people.
There should a be no anti semistsm in the party and anyone found out to be a anti semtimte should be kicked out of the party. But this idea the anti semitism has grown since Corbyn and the far left won power in the party is simply untrue.
This is a long but very good article
https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/sh...these-disgraceful-slurs-against-jeremy-corbyn
So, I had written a response to @2cents but can't ind it now.
Part of it was looking at the major incidents of anti-Semitism in Corbyn's Labour, which turned out to be very connected: Ken -> Charavorty -> definition.
For that specific example, this was the conclusion of her sham inquiry:
Now, a parliamentary select committee also looked into the same allegations. They slammed Corbyn and her.
This was their conclusion:
Labours code doesn't allow members to blame all Jews for Israel's crimes
If Labour has no more a problem with anti-semitism in the party than other parties, and no more than under previous leadership, it is difficult not to come to the conclusion that this is a deliberate smear campaign aimed at discrediting Corbyn, firstly, to keep him out of power, and failing that, to make it far more difficult for him to stand up for Palestinian rights.
Anti-Semite? This is Jeremy Corbyn for crying out loud.
Anti-Semite? This is Jeremy Corbyn for crying out loud.
Thought this was a pretty fair thread:
The tl;dr read of it basically being that there's very little difference (if any, in reality) between Labour and the IHRA's definition and that Labour would have been pragmatic to just accept IHRA's definition rather than try and re-define anti-semitism given the issues with it in the party.
The tl;dr read of it basically being that there's very little difference (if any, in reality) between Labour and the IHRA's definition and that Labour would have been pragmatic to just accept IHRA's definition rather than try and re-define anti-semitism given the issues with it in the party.
I’ve given you a decent sampling of mainstream Jewish opinion. You’ve given me Billy Bragg, some pro Corbyn cranks and a bit of whataboutery. Powerful stuff.
Why are there spoilers being used?
Is it to avoid us knowing the plot?
Is it to avoid us knowing the plot?
Or he’s such a useless leader he’s somehow managed to turn a historic Labour, and alleged personal strength, into a long running source of negative headlines. But you can’t admit that can you, so it has to be a conspiracy.
He’s hoping nobody clicks to read his argument
Indeed. If Labour really valued its links with the Jewish community, you’d think they’d be going about this kind of thing differently.
Corbyn should go to Seder with some of the Jewish people who live in his constituency.
I’m not saying it’s a conspiracy. It’s more like anti-Corbyn, pro-Israel elements have seized the opportunity, which first appeared in the Ken Livingstone incident, to incessantly smear Corbyn and the Labour Party as anti-Semitic. Short of giving in to what are essentially demands for a complete capitulation by Corbyn to ensure his and the party’s future silence on Israel, I’m not sure what else he could do at the moment.
I mean, there is just nothing of substance to support the allegation of anti-semitism.
Why would they? There are about 270,000 Jews in the UK and as a demographic are high earners. I don't think Corbyn is anti semitic, but he's a socialist. The Jewish community has very little value to Labour. Having little or no value doesn't mean the Labour party is anti Jewish people, but let's not pretend the accusations of anti semitism really effect them. If they were seen as anti Islamic or anti black, now that would effectively end the Labour Party, as they are completely reliant on the two largest ethnic minority votes.
Why would a high earning demographic give two craps about the Labour Party and vice versa?
Yikes.
Does not approving of Israel's stance make someone anti-semetic? Generic question - I'm not talking about Jeremy Corbyn.
Is this going to be another 'Corbyn has no real political mileage by alienating Brexit supporting labour demographic' bullshit?
There should be nothing wrong with disapproving with many of Israel's actions in Palestine and Gaza, particularly when they are in violation of UN resolutions and such disapproval or criticism is not an indication of anti-semitism but it's unfortunately become a very easy way to silence people and nullify any other things they say.
And I think this is why Jeremy Corbyn is being vilified.
Why do you say "yikes?" Its just reality. There is only so much funding and time any political party has.
No, it's got absolutely nothing to do with that. Jews are among the highest earners in the UK. They are a tiny part of the population. Hence not exactly a high priority for Labour.
Let's put it another way, do you think Labour put much effort into places like Eastbourne or Winchester? Or the the Conservatives really push hard in Liverpool? Of course not and it's the same with demographics. Why would Labour really be that bothered about a small, majority conservative demographic? As I said in my previous post, I don't think Corbyn is anti semitic, but at the same time, let's not pretend that he or the Labour party are going to really value links with the Jewish community. Not because they are racist or don't like them, but because they don't help them achieve their goals.
Cheers for wasting my time. Also jew who disagrees with you = Corbyn crank, nice one mate really good work you've done there.
Last edited:
Well I thought yikes too to be honest. Firstly your post came across as saying Labour is only for the poor, thus dooming it to electoral failure, and secondly it's ok to be antisemitic because jews are rich. Now I'm sure you didn't mean either of those things, but as written that's the way it comes across.
Ah, your subsequent post cleared it up a bit.
The current debate concerns the IHRA definition of antisemitism. The definition makes it clear that criticism of Israel is not necessarily antisemitic - it states explicitly that "criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic." However, it proposes that in certain circumstances/contexts, criticism of Israel might be antisemitic.
Here's the video of Corbyn on Press TV in 2012 which is doing the rounds on Twitter today. It is a good example of how 'criticism of Israel' may in a particular context veer into antisemitism:
On the face of it, all Corbyn has done is said he suspects Israeli involvement in the jihadi attack on Egyptian forces. No mention of Jews, just criticism of Israel. And yet he has said it with zero proof, just based on his idea of "who benefits?" So he posits an Israeli false-flag attack aimed at driving a wedge between "Palestine" and the new Morsi government in Cairo. It's a conspiracy theory which anyone who understands basic antisemitic tropes will immediately recognize - the idea that Jews work undercover to undermine legitimate governments and sew chaos around the world is a classic. That doesn't necessarily mean Corbyn's actual statement is antisemitic in intent (although since when did intent matter when it comes to racism?), but it's the kind of thing that would immediately have some alarm bells ringing, as it is unlikely to be a coincidence that the world's only Jewish state is the number one recipient (by quite a margin I'd guess) of these types of conspiratorial, false-flag accusations. Corbyn's anti-Zionism is conspiratorial and in this case seems to utilize an accusation classically thrown by antisemites at Jews in order to smear the only Jewish state. It's something a man in his position really should have known to avoid...
However, he gave the statement on Press TV (an old haunt of his), which brings us to the part of the IHRA definition which talks about "taking into account the overall context..." Press TV is an antisemitic channel which has hosted Holocaust deniers and various crack-pot conspiracy theorists with an Israel obsession. It is the English-language propaganda arm of an antisemitic regime. So Corbyn is here proposing an Israel conspiracy which looks a lot like an antisemitic conspiracy on the antisemitic news channel of the antisemitic Iranian regime.
And this is exactly the reason why, whatever the statistics may show about the prevalence of antisemitism in Labour before and after Corbyn, and whatever Corbyn actually believes in his heart, he will not get the benefit of the doubt from most Jews on this issue, and neither will the Labour Party while he is in charge. He is someone who at the very least is comfortable in an environment where the line between anti-Zionism and antisemitism is often/frequently blurred - indeed it seems to me like much of his activism on behalf of the Palestinians has been conducted in such an environment.
Even foreign policy mag was publishing articles about Israel's interests in Egypt around the time of the Arab Spring, the rise of the brotherhood was seen as a risk to the 1979 peace treaty. It's hardly confined to David Icke and 4chan that Israel took an active interest in what was going on there.