Smores
Full Member
- Joined
- May 18, 2011
- Messages
- 26,169
Isn't it funny how certain posters no longer care about this stuff.
Is he even a member (I know he stopped donating in 2016 not sure if he remained a member) - if he is then get the independent body set up and allow it to investigate (as per the EHRC recommendations) ... you know rather than let him make some half assed faux apology and think thats going to fix stuffIsn't it funny how certain posters no longer care about this stuff.
send back his one month donation - I mean if hes not a member thats literally all labour can do I think - and even then that's not a decision for the leader is it?Abrahams is the latest Blair-era donor drawn back to Labour by Starmer. He confirmed last month that he had set up a direct debit to the Labour party, having ceased donations in 2016.
Amazing isn't it. Maybe because they only care about what they've been told to care about.Isn't it funny how certain posters no longer care about this stuff.
From early september
Don't think they've even commented on it yet have they? Or the Mandelson comments.
Meanwhile they're suspending Jewish Socialist members for daring to also have a view on the Corbyn issues.
Don't think they've even commented on it yet have they? Or the Mandelson comments.
Meanwhile they're suspending Jewish Socialist members for daring to also have a view on the Corbyn issues.
Isn't it funny how certain posters no longer care about this stuff.
Why don't you just spit it out and ask them then?Amazing isn't it. Maybe because they only care about what they've been told to care about.
Barely any comment from the certain posters about the EHRC report into Windrush. Funny that. But that is for another thread.
Why don't you just spit it out and ask them then?
Fair enough, just seemed preferable to people griping. Sun is generally not shy in giving opinionsAlready tagged Sun tzu on the matter, the rest have gone back to brunch so not going to chase them back in here. Their guy is in charge so they're no longer interested in discussion hence their absence.
It's as equally applicable to the media to be fair but then we all said this would happen.
Don't think they've even commented on it yet have they? Or the Mandelson comments.
Meanwhile they're suspending Jewish Socialist members for daring to also have a view on the Corbyn issues.
Keir's Labour party ban CLPs from raising motions supporting Corbyn and suspend party members for doing so. It is the purge we were always told to expect from Corbyn, but he was too fair minded and wanted unity in the party. It seems Starmer is content with division.
“Please note that individual disciplinary cases that are being dealt with through the NEC disputes processes are confidential. Motions on individual cases are therefore not competent business for discussion at CLPs and will not be discussed by the NEC or any associated bodies.”
– Jennie Formby, 2019
Seems pretty consistent right?
Wrong.
How many MPs, after being found innocent by the NEC have then had the whip removed and been removed from the PLP while Corbyn was leader?
Starmer acting like he cares not about fighting the Tories, only keen on purging the Labour Party left. Just as the pressure was mounting with Rashfords campaign. Absolute own goal. Nothing more unelectable than a party fighting internal factions rather than looking outward and talking to the country.
The report he doesn’t agree with states he broke the law... I don’t see how there can be an argument?
If Corbyn weren’t so self-serving, we wouldn’t have given the interview that got him suspended in the first place. There is absolutely no need for him to be giving those kinds of interviews now he isn’t Labour leader.
Well the party he was in charge of rather than Corbyn himself of course, fairly big distinction. The party would have breached the rules prior to Corbyn and he actually instigated more positive governance/procedural changes than his predecessors.
I do think it was self-serving from him to give that interview but i have sympathy given the reporting wasn't at all balanced. They barely mentioned the actual rule breaches because it was too far removed from institutionally anti-semetic which they all wanted.
I missed your prior response though. She was suspended not because she repeated Corbyn's claim (which again isn't an issue for a member anyway) but because the CLPs have been banned from any discussion on Corbyn/EHRC/Anti-semtism.
Jewish members aren't allowed to voice their opinions about Anti-semtism in the Labour party because it might make other Jewish members uncomfortable. Labour have seemingly decided the Jewish community all think alike.
That’s a bit crap. You’d think having an open debate about the issue would be the way to go, not censorship.
Fundamentally I don’t disagree that the way the media report the whole issue was and is unbalanced but ultimately when the direction from Starmer was not to criticise the report, you can hardly have any complaints when you (Corbyn) are suspended for doing exactly that
What law are you referring to?The report he doesn’t agree with states he broke the law... I don’t see how there can be an argument?
If Corbyn weren’t so self-serving, we wouldn’t have given the interview that got him suspended in the first place. There is absolutely no need for him to be giving those kinds of interviews now he isn’t Labour leader.
I can agree with some of this. Your last sentence pretty much sums up the absolute mess being created by Starmer.Well the party he was in charge of rather than Corbyn himself of course, fairly big distinction. The party would have breached the rules prior to Corbyn and he actually instigated more positive governance/procedural changes than his predecessors.
I do think it was self-serving from him to give that interview but i have sympathy given the reporting wasn't at all balanced. They barely mentioned the actual rule breaches because it was too far removed from institutionally anti-semetic which they all wanted.
I missed your prior response though. She was suspended not because she repeated Corbyn's claim (which again isn't an issue for a member anyway) but because the CLPs have been banned from any discussion on Corbyn/EHRC/Anti-semtism.
Jewish members aren't allowed to voice their opinions about Anti-semtism in the Labour party because it might make other Jewish members uncomfortable. Labour have seemingly decided the Jewish community all think alike.
The problem is that Starmer is actually trying to win the racist vote. Not by changing their opinion, but hoping he won’t turn them off if he isn’t outspoken against racism himself (besides antisemitism). He won’t say as much, but that’s clearly why he is reluctant to speak out. It’s embarrassing.
Other than a few journalists on the left, he won’t get called out for it either because by and large, the media who pose as bastions of virtue when it suits them, don’t care about racism either... unless it can be used a stick to beat the left with. Transparent and pathetic.
Made an appearance on LBC this morning.
Failing to condemn white supremacy on a public platform, but the booing is bad.
The guy's a useless clown when it comes to anti-black racism, and it's incredibly telling just how normalised all this is.
Yeah I've just that clip here.
Not a good look. I'm afraid we'll get a lot more of this as he tries to win back a certain section of the electorate.
Yeah I've just that clip here.
Not a good look. I'm afraid we'll get a lot more of this as he tries to win back a certain section of the electorate.
I’d like to see him show some bottle and go on at 10 o clock with James O’Brien, but he wouldn’t give him an easy time.
Made an appearance on LBC this morning.
Failing to condemn white supremacy on a public platform, but the booing is bad.
The guy's a useless clown when it comes to anti-black racism, and it's incredibly telling just how normalised all this is.