Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)

What's the odds that if Corbyn does not change to campaigning for a 2nd ref that conference is dominated by people trying to change the party position?
There is perhaps a few more weeks fence sitting can be done but not much more than that... Ge or not (and I suspect not) there is going to have to be a decision taken by labour as to if they actively push for a 2nd ref... Will be interesting to see if Corbyn changes stance early or puts up a fight
 
What's the odds that if Corbyn does not change to campaigning for a 2nd ref that conference is dominated by people trying to change the party position?
There is perhaps a few more weeks fence sitting can be done but not much more than that... Ge or not (and I suspect not) there is going to have to be a decision taken by labour as to if they actively push for a 2nd ref... Will be interesting to see if Corbyn changes stance early or puts up a fight
Seems more like McClusky's stance these days.
 
Yeah... Conference will be fun... Suspect it's going to me a (loosing?) Battle to keep referendum motions off the agenda
We've been saying this for the last few but he finds a way to fudge them.
 
Exactly what Labour need right now. To purge from cabinet the people who represent what the membership actually want.
 


An actual member of the shadow cabinet. Even if you think the problem of anti-semitism has been overblown this is fairly clear evidence there are people in the party at a relatively senior level who don't give a feck either way.
 


An actual member of the shadow cabinet. Even if you think the problem of anti-semitism has been overblown this is fairly clear evidence there are people in the party at a relatively senior level who don't give a feck either way.

He said, she hadn't even read the tweet; as if that makes it better.

I do think he is not the sharpest. They shouldn't be sending him out to do interviews.
 
Last edited:
He said, she hadn't even read the tweet"; as if that makes it better.

I do think he is a not the sharpest. They shouldn't be sending him out to do interviews.

Probably not, nah, if I'm thinking of the correct person he's got a habit of committing gaffes. But at the same time if you're a Jewish person in Britain I can see why you'd find this sort of stuff remarkably insidious when it's working it's way up to prominent members in a main party - ignorance/stupidity is often a fairly convenient excuse for people who say and do bad things.
 
Labour talk is a bit of a red herring. They returned pretty poorly here (they've only thrice returned lower in the history of the party) and won the by election as the result of the Brexit vote being split two ways.

That's good news for Labour which will probably replicate nationally (it would be a huge irony if Farage's Brexit party succeeded in getting Labour elected) but the real conversation should be bout the Conservatives. I can't really see how they will look at today's result and conclude anything other than they need to lurch further towards the right.

Oh and :lol: at the CHUK backed candidate finishing behind the Monster Raving Looney party.


No....They won through Postal Votes - a Labour speciality





https://www.change.org/p/men-previo...-were-counted-in-the-peterborough-by-election
 


An actual member of the shadow cabinet. Even if you think the problem of anti-semitism has been overblown this is fairly clear evidence there are people in the party at a relatively senior level who don't give a feck either way.

Tbf in this instance, if her explanation is correct, it makes sense - the captions on fb photos/videos are quite hidden, and you can like the photo without seeing the caption. I" pretty sure I've done it many times.
 
Tbf in this instance, if her explanation is correct, it makes sense - the captions on fb photos/videos are quite hidden, and you can like the photo without seeing the caption. I" pretty sure I've done it many times.

The problem is more the fact that he's equating anti-semitism with snorting a line or two. If his argument was that she didn't know it was anti-semitism then that's different (albeit still problematic) but here the argument seems to suggest that it's alright to be anti-semitic sometimes because the Tories are cnuts as well.
 
The problem is more the fact that he's equating anti-semitism with snorting a line or two. If his argument was that she didn't know it was anti-semitism then that's different (albeit still problematic) but here the argument seems to suggest that it's alright to be anti-semitic sometimes because the Tories are cnuts as well.
the argument is that the problematic thing was the caption not the photo. it's not that she saw the caption and didnt know it was anti-s, it's that she didn't see it at all.

agree abt the 1st part.
 
Is there anything that makes this more than speculation? Brexit Party would've probably gained massively from postal votes too as older people are generally a lot more likely to vote by post and older people like Brexit a lot more than the young.


Probably more than a grain of truth in the claims, I reckon.

Not sure the Brexit Party would have gained much from Postal Votes although it's possible, of course.

But Labour do have previous on Postal Vote Fraud....
 
He said, she hadn't even read the tweet; as if that makes it better.

I do think he is a not the sharpest. They shouldn't be sending him out to do interviews.
Indeed. He learns his brief and parrots it out but when asked a supplementary question he then generally sits there in total confusion for an age until he repeats the same thing again.

Currently all Labour spokespeople have obviously been told to answer the question 'what's your policy on brexit?' with 'it's what was decided at party conference' but at the end of every interview you're somehow left still wondering what it is.
 
Mike Pompeo tells Jewish leaders he would 'push back' against Corbyn


Labour has accused Donald Trump’s top official, Mike Pompeo, of trying to stop Jeremy Corbyn becoming prime minister, after he was caught on tape telling Jewish leaders that he would “push back” against the party’s leadership.

In a recording leaked to the Washington Post, the US secretary of state was asked what he would do if Corbyn were to be elected as prime minister, after sustained criticism over Labour’s handling of accusations of antisemitism within the party.

The questioner said: “Would you be willing to work with us to take on actions if life becomes very difficult for Jews in the UK?” In response, Pompeo appeared to suggest that he would seek to intervene in the debate before Corbyn had a chance to become prime minister.

“It could be that Mr Corbyn manages to run the gauntlet and get elected,” he said on the recording. “It’s possible. You should know, we won’t wait for him to do those things to begin to push back. We will do our level best. It’s too risky and too important and too hard once it’s already happened.”

A Labour spokesman said: “President Trump and his officials’ attempts to decide who will be Britain’s next prime minister are an entirely unacceptable interference in the UK’s democracy.” He added that the party was “fully committed to the support, defence and celebration of the Jewish community and is implacably opposed to antisemitism in any form”.

Pompeo’s comments emerged after Trump turned down Corbyn’s request for a meeting during his state visit to the UK last week, saying the leader was “somewhat of a negative force”. Corbyn joined protests outside Trump’s press conference with Theresa May, where he pledged to oppose the US president’s drive for greater access for US health companies to NHS contracts.

The comments come at a time when Corbyn’s team are nervous about the latest attempts to oust him from within the party over the issues of antisemitism and Brexit, after several senior figures came out in support of a second referendum.

Shadow cabinet sources said the leadership was preparing to take on Tom Watson and his supporters after his vocal campaign to soften Corbyn’s Brexit position, with moves under way to generate momentum in favour of a new deputy leadership election.

There is growing talk about the possibility of the party’s rules being changed to create a second deputy leader, alongside Watson, but also the possibility of a new deputy leadership contest altogether. Some Corbyn supporters are circulating motions against Watson around local constituency Labour parties and a grassroots petition against the deputy leader has got about 26,000 signatures so far.

One shadow cabinet minister said they believed the leadership wanted to make the shadow cabinet less in favour of a second referendum. As part of this, Corbyn’s team considered swapping Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary, with Diane Abbott, the home secretary, over her support for a second referendum and wider foreign policy issues.

However, it is understood that Thornberry has more recently been assured that she will not be moved and that Abbott was opposed to such a plan anyway, which would make the move difficult to carry out without a public battle.

A Labour source said there were no plans at all for a reshuffle and dismissed speculation about moves within the top team as mischief-making.

Talk of a reshuffle was sparked when Thornberry was dropped as Corbyn’s usual stand-in for prime minister’s questions this week after speaking out about
Labour’s strategy for the European elections
. On polling day last month, Thornberry said Labour was “not clear on the one single thing that people wanted to hear”. She was replaced at the dispatch box by Rebecca Long-Bailey, a rising star on the left of the party and a staunch Corbyn loyalist.

Jewish Leaders seem very worried about a Corbyn lead party.
 
I can't believe this isn't headline news. The US secretary of state is discussing intervening in British politics to prevent JC from ever becoming PM.
 
The questioner said: “Would you be willing to work with us to take on actions if life becomes very difficult for Jews in the UK?”
Not a loaded question at all!
 
Labour party workers having a ballot over austerity measures... Imposed by labour party

Oooooh Jeremy Corbyn

.
LABOUR-STRIKE-BALLOT-copy.png


Guido understands that after a long-running row over pay, Labour Party staff have formally decided to hold a ballot on strike action. The decision was taken today although the ballot won’t happen immediately. Among those pushing hard for a strike was Mary Robinson – Jeremy Corbyn’s head of economic policy – Robinson apparently said “it doesn’t matter how much it will cost, we need to deliver it.” Much like Labour’s wider economic policies…

Not everyone was quite as enthusiastic, one Unite rep reportedly told staff to “think carefully about this and the harm it will do to the party”. Will Corbyn be going down to the picket line to join the protests against his own party?


https://order-order.com/2019/06/11/labour-staff-formally-decide-hold-ballot-strike-action/
.
More internal trouble in the Labour Party – now the so-called party of workers is facing industrial action from its own staffers. Labour had been in pay negotiations with the GMB and Unite unions since December over staffers’ January pay rise, Labour have struggled to come up with any money to pay them. Labour running out of money? Funny that…

The Labour General Secretary’s final offer to GMB and Unite was revealed this week – an £800 rise per employee. Despite seeing it as a bad offer, both unions recommended staff vote in favour of the limited raise. Normally unions only accept an offer they see as poor if the organisation they’re bargaining with is in financial difficulties…

Yesterday Labour staff rejected the offer by an overwhelming 37-133 votes. Southside sources tell Guido that the atmosphere is “horrific” in the building, threats of taking industrial action are swirling. A full on strike is unlikely, however the party is bracing itself for staffers refusing to work overtime. Pretty drastic considering the party is in the middle of an election campaign…
 
The problem is more the fact that he's equating anti-semitism with snorting a line or two. If his argument was that she didn't know it was anti-semitism then that's different (albeit still problematic) but here the argument seems to suggest that it's alright to be anti-semitic sometimes because the Tories are cnuts as well.
No, he is equating not thoroughly reading a caption below a picture before you click like vs. snorting a line or two.
 
No, he is equating not thoroughly reading a caption below a picture before you click like vs. snorting a line or two.

But this isn't some one incident - it's happened again and again with various key party members and MP's. Why do these people warrant continual good faith when it's clear there's a wider issue here? Are Labour MP's somehow cursed insofar as they keep on accidentally liking anti-semitic content, or associating with anti-semitic people, or saying anti-semitic things, even if they don't intend to?
 
But this isn't some one incident - it's happened again and again with various key party members and MP's. Why do these people warrant continual good faith when it's clear there's a wider issue here? Are Labour MP's somehow cursed insofar as they keep on accidentally liking anti-semitic content, or associating with anti-semitic people, or saying anti-semitic things, even if they don't intend to?

I think there is a level of scrutiny applied to Labour MPs that isn't applied to others. The kind of thing she has been caught for won't be detected unless someone spent hours looking for exactly it. Remember that polls and reports show that anti-semitism within the party isn't higher than elsewhere.
 
I think there is a level of scrutiny applied to Labour MPs that isn't applied to others. The kind of thing she has been caught for won't be detected unless someone spent hours looking for exactly it. Remember that polls and reports show that anti-semitism within the party isn't higher than elsewhere.
So why is the equalities commission only having a formal investigation into the labour party... Are they biased... Are they part of the Illuminati...
Or could it be that actually there is more evidence of serious wrongdoing by labour?
 
I think there is a level of scrutiny applied to Labour MPs that isn't applied to others. The kind of thing she has been caught for won't be detected unless someone spent hours looking for exactly it. Remember that polls and reports show that anti-semitism within the party isn't higher than elsewhere.

Oh I absolutely agree - the Tories have a problem with anti-Muslim sentiment that's as big as, if not much bigger than, Labour's anti-semitism problem. If Corbyn weren't regarded with as much scrutiny as he has been then this certainly wouldn't be getting brought up. And I doubt a Corbyn government would be particularly hostile as such to Jewish people in Britain.

But ultimately it has become an issue, even if it's been overblown - and the party's response to said issue strikes me as worrying in how consistently dismissive they are of it. Even if these incidents are minor, small prejudices can gradually ramp up over time and Jewish people in Britain and beyond certainly have good reason to be very, very concerned about even the slightest prejudice when it does emerge. Especially because genuine and fair criticism of Israel can very often end up meshing with anti-semitism in certain circles etc.
 
So why is the equalities commission only having a formal investigation into the labour party... Are they biased... Are they part of the Illuminati...
Or could it be that actually there is more evidence of serious wrongdoing by labour?

Do you think the party that ran Zac Goldsmith's 2016 Mayoral campaign doesn't have evidence of wrongdoing?
 
Do you think the party that ran Zac Goldsmith's 2016 Mayoral campaign doesn't have evidence of wrongdoing?
And look at the published columns from their leadership contest front runner...
 
So why is the equalities commission only having a formal investigation into labour?
Are they biased?
Are they part of the Illuminati?
Or do you have another reason

Also part of the Illuminati:
The Campaign AGainst Antisemitism, YouGov, The Institute for Jewish Policy Research, Shami Chakravarty, Jan Royall, and David Feldman
In 2015, 2016 and 2017, the Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) commissioned YouGov to survey British attitudes towards Jews.[318] The 2017 survey found that supporters of the Labour Party were less likely to hold antisemitic views than those of the Conservative Party or the UK Independence Party (UKIP), while those of the Liberal Democrats were the least likely to hold such views. 32% of Labour supporters endorsed at least one "antisemitic attitude", as defined by the CAA, compared to 30% for the Liberal Democrat, 39% for UKIP supporters, and 40% for the Conservatives.
...
A study into contemporary antisemitism in Britain by the Institute for Jewish Policy Research (JPR) in September 2017 study found that those on the political left were no more likely than average to hold antisemitic attitudes, but were more likely to hold anti-Israel attitudes, especially those on the far-left.
...
In June, the inquiry reported that it had found "no evidence" of systemic antisemitism in Labour
 
Last edited:
Also part of the Illumanati:
The Campaign AGainst Antisemitism, YouGov, The Institute for Jewish Policy Research, Shami Chakravarty, Jan Royall, and David Feldman
.
An Equality and Human Rights Commission spokesperson said:

‘Having received a number of complaints regarding antisemitism in the Labour Party, we believe the Labour Party may have unlawfully discriminated against people because of their ethnicity and religious beliefs.
https://www.equalityhumanrights.com...semitism-labour-party-our-response-complaints

So again why is there only a formal investigation into labour?

Do you believe the equalities commission would do this without evidence?

Do you believe the equalities commission wouldn't undertake similar investigation into other parties if the same evidence bar was reached ?

If no then the investigation is clearly warranted
If yes then on what do you base that?
 
https://www.equalityhumanrights.com...semitism-labour-party-our-response-complaints

So again why is there only a formal investigation into labour?

Do you believe the equalities commission would do this without evidence?

Do you believe the equalities commission wouldn't undertake similar investigation into other parties if the same evidence bar was reached ?

If no then the investigation is clearly warranted
If yes then on what do you base that?

So why did Shami Chakravarti (no Corbynite), Jan Royall, and David Feldman report " "no evidence" of systemic antisemitism in Labour"?

Do you believe the commission would say this without ecidence?
 
The Illuminati also influenced the all-party House Commons Affairs Select Committee into concluding that there was "no reliable, empirical evidence to support the notion that there is a higher prevalence of antisemitic attitudes within the Labour Party than any other party."

Damn those illuminati guys have got their hands everywhere except the Equalities Commission it seems.