Keir Starmer Labour Leader

Why the fixation on what the public think is the scale of the problem? Are there any issues of race discrimination where public perceptions match facts?

Seems like a convenient way to minimise the problem. Does Corbyn and his supporters truly think it helps those who have suffered antisemitism when they hear the problem is overstated?
 
As I've stated, I don't agree with that abuse but she's still a garbage person. Can you please explain to me why you think she isn't garbage?

Personally I wouldn’t consider a person as garbage for changing political parties. I mean she moved to parties with a fair bit of overlap with the Labour Party. It’s not like she joined the Tories. Perhaps she is a careerist but then I wouldn‘t even write her off as garbage for that. Given that she had to have security as a Labour MP because of threats against her and the failings of how Labour handled threats against her I think she had good reason to leave.
 
Personally I wouldn’t consider a person as garbage for changing political parties. I mean she moved to parties with a fair bit of overlap with the Labour Party. It’s not like she joined the Tories. Perhaps she is a careerist but then I wouldn‘t even write her off as garbage for that. Given that she had to have security as a Labour MP because of threats against her and the failings of how Labour handled threats against her I think she had good reason to leave.
For me, anyone who was part of the mass walk out in 2016 is garbage. Labour friends of Israel is also an organisation I don't trust and by extension, someone high up in it is not someone I can trust.
Quite a few Corbyn supporters have left the Labour party this week, including some on here, are they all garbage too?
I'm sure some of them probably are.
 
Coming back to Starmer for a second, I saw him pop up in the Stephen Lawrence tribute during the United - Arsenal coverage earlier, a couple of weeks after he whipped Labour MPs to abstain on a bill that gives police carte blanche to continue to infiltrate protest and advocacy groups like they did with the group set up to seek justice for the failure to properly investigate Stephen Lawrence's death.
 
Not entirely sure why you needed to bring her gender into this other than to suggest I'm in some way sexist?

She is garbage by the way.
Yeah she probably deserved it then, particularly the rape and death threats.
 
Yeah she probably deserved it then, particularly the rape and death threats.
I will just restate my point because clearly you're having some trouble grasping this basic point. I do not agree with the abuse or the threats. The sentences and punishment handed out to those who perpetrated those offences were fair and I hope it helps combat antisemitism in general. That does not mean that she's not garbage.
 
Putting aside anything else, the fact that the media and anti-Corbyn actors across the political spectrum managed to create a situation where the average person on the street thought 1/3 of the Labour membership had been disciplined for antisemitism is truly shocking and should give us all pause for thought.

Whilst those of us on the left will obviously be very frustrated at the way that false impression was built and used as a rod to beat Corbyn with, the main takeaway should be to consider how terrifying the last few years must have been for the majority of the Jewish community, who have faced or witnessed antisemitic abuse either in person or online, are constantly hearing in the media or from community leaders that one of the candidates to be Prime Minister is backed by hundreds of thousands of antisemites, and whose concerns about the situation, rather than being met with understanding, were often met with antisemitic accusations of complicity with an Israel-backed conspiracy.

With all that in mind, the left should have some empathy and understand why some things we think are self-evident facts might still be sensitive. On the other hand, frankly, there has to be some reckoning for those who created and fed a climate of fear which quite literally left many Jews afraid for their lives for the sake of anti-left factionalism within the Party and anti-left electoral strategy outside of it.

Nothing to do with the former leader of the Labour party repeatedly being equivocal in his ‘efforts’ to counter the antisemitism in his party, right? None of this is Jezza’s fault. Of course.
 
I'm not. Why is she not garbage in your view?
I'm glad.

I don't tend to go referring to a woman who has suffered an unrelenting torrent of antisemitic abuse and death threats - resulting in several people being sent to prison - as "garbage". I also commend her for being the first one to raise the issue of Corbyn's praise of the antisemitic mural and being a leading figure in the fight against antisemitism within the Labour Party. I really don't think we would have seen the Equalities and Human Rights Commission investigation and ruling on illegal discrimination and harassment of Jews without the bravery of people like her, who were willing to stand up to the leadership.

I also note that you have denigrated two of the oldest and most prominent Jewish Labour organisations, calling the Jewish Labour Movement (founded 1903) a "nasty little organisation", and saying you cannot "trust" anyone in Labour Friends of Israel (founded 1957). You have also taken issue with antisemitism as a concept, complaining about an "impossibly broad definition of antisemitism".

You have also on many occasions stated that antisemitism within the Labour party, and on the left, is "fake":
"Keir decides to shift the focus to yet another fake antisemitism scandal on the Labour party."
"This whole episode has shown that there were a huge number of false accusations made to clog up the disciplinary system."
"The problem is that because of the sheer volume of false accusations."
"It's fake anti semitism, the same type that has been used to subdue the left for as long as I've followed politics."

I think anyone reading will make up their own mind.
 
Last edited:
I'm glad.

I don't tend to go referring to a woman who has suffered an unrelenting torrent of antisemitic abuse and death threats - resulting in several people being sent to prison - as "garbage". I also commend her for being the first one to raise the issue of Corbyn's praise of the antisemitic mural and being a leading figure in the fight against antisemitism within the Labour Party. I really don't think we would have seen the Equalities and Human Rights Commission investigation and ruling on illegal discrimination and harassment of Jews without the bravery of people like her, who were willing to stand up to the leadership.

I also note that you have denigrated two of the oldest and most prominent Jewish Labour organisations, calling the Jewish Labour Movement (founded 1903) a "nasty little organisation", and saying you cannot "trust" anyone in Labour Friends of Israel (founded 1957). You have also taken issue with antisemitism as a concept, complaining about an "impossibly broad definition of antisemitism".

You have also on many occasions stated that antisemitism within the Labour party, and on the left, is "fake":
"Keir decides to shift the focus to yet another fake antisemitism scandal on the Labour party."
"This whole episode has shown that there were a huge number of false accusations made to clog up the disciplinary system."
"The problem is that because of the sheer volume of false accusations."
"It's fake anti semitism, the same type that has been used to subdue the left for as long as I've followed politics."

I think anyone reading will make up their own mind.
Nice one for the personal attack, much appreciated.

Why don't you provide a little context on my comments? For example, my calling the JLM a nasty little organisation was in response to them supporting the illegal Israeli settlements. Would you not agree that supporting illegal displacement of Palestinians is rather heinous, possibly even bordering on nasty?

I can see here that instead of addressing my point you've decided to employ the very Tory tactic of attacking your opposition personally. Thanks very much for the insinuation that I'm antisemitic, I'll remember to ignore your posts going forward.
 
Why don't you provide a little context on my comments? For example, my calling the JLM a nasty little organisation was in response to them supporting the illegal Israeli settlements. Would you not agree that supporting illegal displacement of Palestinians is rather heinous, possibly even bordering on nasty?
I took the trouble to include a link to every quote so people can click and see full context.

I've not seen JLM advocating for illegal settlements, but do provide a link. They are affiliated with various other Jewish organisations (including the Board of Deputies of British Jews, the Zionist Federation of the UK, the World Zionist Organisation and the Israeli Labor Party) - from your comment, it seems you are taking issue with the position of some of these other organisations?

I can see here that instead of addressing my point you've decided to employ the very Tory tactic of attacking your opposition personally. Thanks very much for the insinuation that I'm antisemitic, I'll remember to ignore your posts going forward.
I did address your point and explained why I would not describe Luciana Berger as "garbage".

I've literally just quoted your own posts, if that comes across as a "personal attack", perhaps it should cause you to pause and reflect on your words. Hopefully seeing it laid out in a comprehensive way might help you understand why you come off as you do to people on here.
 
Last edited:
I have linked to every quote so people can click and see full context.

I've not seen JLM advocating for illegal settlements, but do provide a link. They are affiliated with various other Jewish organisation (including the Board of Deputies of British Jews, the Zionist Federation of the UK, the World Zionist Organisation and the Israeli Labor Party) - from your comment, it seems you are taking issue with some of these other organisations positions?


I did address your point and explained why I would not describe Luciana Berger as "garbage".

In terms of an "attack", I've literally just quoted your own posts. Hopefully seeing it laid out in a comprehensive way might help you understand why you come off as you do to people on here.
How about you try clicking the very link you provided? I was literally replying to a comment in this thread, you can see it quoted.

On another note, it's a fact that a number of antisemitism cases in the Labour party were fake. One of those comments was specifically in regard the RLB sacking which, again, was not antisemitism. You know full well that the majority of people will see a list of out of context quotes, not click on them, and form a rather unpleasant opinion of me.

I hate all forms of racism and bigotry but I also hate the weaponisation it for political gain. Both ruins lives.
 
Nothing to do with the former leader of the Labour party repeatedly being equivocal in his ‘efforts’ to counter the antisemitism in his party, right? None of this is Jezza’s fault. Of course.

You seem to be arguing against what you want the post you've quoted to say, rather than what it says. Nowhere in there does it say that Corbyn doesn't bear some responsibility for the antisemitism present in the party under his tenure.
 
How about you try clicking the very link you provided? I was literally replying to a comment in this thread, you can see it quoted.
As I said, the link you replied to about the JLM referred to the positions of other organisations (namely the Israeli Labour Party and the World Zionist Organisation). I can't work out if you have misunderstood that, or are saying the JLM is responsible for the positions of those organisation through its affiliation? Or if you have other links to evidence that the JLM supports illegal settlements?

The Jewish Labour Movement is clearly one of the oldest and most high profile Jewish organisations on the left in the UK. It was also one of the primary complainants in the EHRC investigation. Calling it a "nasty little organisation" is going to raise eyebrows.
 
You seem to be arguing against what you want the post you've quoted to say, rather than what it says. Nowhere in there does it say that Corbyn doesn't bear some responsibility for the antisemitism present in the party under his tenure.

Fair enough. It’s just that when you say the reckoning needs to be with “anti-left factionalism within the Party and anti-left electoral strategy outside of it” it’s hard to see how you’re acknowledging Corbyn’s role in what happened.
 
Those are all laudable things to do, but step 1 is you have to send a strong signal that it won’t be tolerated. There are multiple audiences here. Long Bailey got kicked out of the shadow cabinet for less.
The difference is, RLB was in Starmer's shadow cabinet. Whether you agree or disagree with whether she should have been sacked, nobody disagrees that it was Starmer's decision to make. On the other hand, deciding to publicly suspend a back bench MP who happens to be the former leader because their personal statement didn't fit well with your media strategy just torpedoes any chance of working constructively towards the path I outlined above. It drives us back into civil war, factionalism and is counter productive to tackling anti-Semitism.

I agree that he's playing to a wider audience than his own party, he's chasing positive headlines, but as Kinnock proved, that approach is usually a hiding to nothing. The media will turn hostile the moment he doesn't follow their precedent, and even more importantly, divided parties don't win elections.
 


I would say this was over the top by the media and extremely disrespectful to holocaust survivors but well I'm worried I might get kicked of out of the Labour party.
 
Last edited:


I would say this was over the top by the media and extremely disrespectful to holocaust survivors but well I'm worried I might get kicked of out of the Labour party.


There was a post here that PM Corbyn would distract from his covid failure by doing pogroms.
Don't you dare suggest that there was any exaggeration about any aspect of this.
 
I'm with Raven on Berger. Undeniable that she's been abused, but she constantly misrepresents the situation such as where that abuse is coming from and the form it takes. Several far right activists have been put in prison for abusing her but she always implies that in general it's coming Corbyn supporters. John Mann did similar in parliament, in a speech attributing an instance of serious abuse to Corbyn supporters that turned out to have happened 5 years before Corbyn was even leader and which happened over something completely different. I hope she does well in her new job as managing director of a PR firm and never goes back into politics.
 
Fair enough. It’s just that when you say the reckoning needs to be with “anti-left factionalism within the Party and anti-left electoral strategy outside of it” it’s hard to see how you’re acknowledging Corbyn’s role in what happened.

I suppose if the party base is to stay somewhat aligned it's important for people to acknowledge all aspects as you say.

I really don't think it's the Corbyn lot (bar a few) that are taking a narrow one sided view as the failings are recognised.

If those who are anti-corbyn could be open and honest enough to recognise the media did inflate the issue (not the impact to any one person) and that certain figures/factions used it as part of a political strategy then debate in here would benefit from it. There's too much factionalism and hypocrisy for open and honest engagement.

Even the Corbyn thread will provide hundreds of examples of it being escalated too far. It's also important to recognise the escalations in themselves caused harm.
 
Fair enough. It’s just that when you say the reckoning needs to be with “anti-left factionalism within the Party and anti-left electoral strategy outside of it” it’s hard to see how you’re acknowledging Corbyn’s role in what happened.

So I think we're talking about separate issues here. The one you've raised is basically 'who is to blame for the failure to deal with antisemitism in the Labour Party since 2015?'. For me, Corbyn undoubtedly bears responsibility for that, alongside some others.

What I'm getting at in the bit you've quoted is the issue of the harm done to the Jewish community, which ultimately it what all this should be about. Of course, there was and is understandable anxiety and fear in the Jewish community caused by the reported incidents of antisemitism in Labour and Corbyn's failure to deal with them quickly and in a way that reassured Jews that the party had their backs. But, at the same time, there's a greater degree of fear and anxiety caused by deliberate exaggeration of the number of antisemitic incidents in the party, and calculated and persistent attempts to paint Corbyn and the left generally as an army of antisemites whose rise to power would pose an existential threat to the Jewish community in Britain. Undeniably, a lot of the stuff that has been said about Corbyn and the Labour left by their political opponents over the last 5 years bears as little or less resemblance to the conclusions of the EHRC report than the statement that got Corbyn suspended did*, @Sweet Square posted a good example of this above. My point, and it's one that Jewish leftists have been raising for years, is that there should be universal condemnation of the ghoulish and irresponsible way anti-Corbyn figures in and out of Labour used their platforms to spread misinformation and pour petrol on the anxieties of the Jewish community before exploiting the resulting fear for their own political gain.

And again for clarity, highlighting the failings of Corbyn's leadership in dealing with antisemitism in the party is entirely valid. Spending 5 years convincing Jews that their lives would be in danger if Labour won an election under Corbyn is ghoulish political opportunism which has caused as much pain to Jewish communities as the actual failings of Labour's disciplinary processes as detailed in the report ever could. I think @Smores has put it quite well above - the escalations and exaggerations themselves are harmful.

*incidentally, much of the post you quoted is a critique of the way Corbyn and some of his supporters have reacted to the report and to the issue generally.
 
Last edited:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p08wt751

Luciana Berger heavily implying that Corbyn is an antisemite for sharing a platform with antisemites. Does this make Sir Keith an antisemite? Does this make Beger herself an antisemite?

I'm incredibly nervous about the way that this is heading. No doubt Starmer will be beaten senseless by the press and the Tories in future for sharing a platform with renowned antisemite, Jeremy Corbyn... he'll deserve it too.

Edit: Never mind, they already have.
 
Last edited:
Coming back to Starmer for a second, I saw him pop up in the Stephen Lawrence tribute during the United - Arsenal coverage earlier, a couple of weeks after he whipped Labour MPs to abstain on a bill that gives police carte blanche to continue to infiltrate protest and advocacy groups like they did with the group set up to seek justice for the failure to properly investigate Stephen Lawrence's death.
Yep. This issue goes back much further too. It needs regulating, not carte blanch approval.

MI5 worked with undercover police to infiltrate Vietnam protests
Papers show secret cooperation as ‘scruffy’ officers spied on anti-war protesters
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...ffy-officers-to-infiltrate-vietnam-protesters
 
So after reading

The former MP for Liverpool Wavertree — who had joined the party as a student and was in effect hounded out of it by antisemitism — received a message online threatening that she “would pay” for the suspension of the former leader Jeremy Corbyn. During a Live Chat session run by the Corbyn-sympathising Novara Media, anonymous commentators dubbed her “a vile fifth columnist” and “the face of evil”. On Twitter she was called a “criminal”, “duplicitous” and a host of misogynistic slurs, while all the classic antisemitic tropes were deployed‘

That‘s your response?

Sorry to jump in to the middle of this, but that Times article about Novara struck a nerve as I have a soft spot for those loveable progressive young whippersnappers.

So Luciana Berger has suffered awful abuse including harassment from far right thugs who have faced criminal charges and I think jail time for their vile behaviour. She has nothing but my sympathy and solidarity for what she's had to endure.

I don't think the article is fair at all though. The event quoted was a live stream on YouTube a few days ago. There were over 6000 viewers and a couple of them posted the vile comments quoted in the live chat. Their volunteer moderators, who are usually excellent at spotting it and removing it straight away, didn't see it and it took around 40 minutes for it to be removed.

It's a bit rich for someone who works as part of Murdoch's racism factory to get high and mighty about a case like this, especially when the comments on her own publications BTL and YouTube videos are filled with racism and far right conspiracy theories.

I'm not saying that makes anti-Semitic comments on the left fine, the posts in question were rightly removed and the accounts banned, but a story from a journalist on Murdoch's payroll whose boss has bemoaned the 'Jewish owned liberal press' attacking a smaller community funded anti-racist progressive outlet for being a hotbed of anti-Semitism is a bit rich.

Anyway, impassioned defense over.
 
If those who are anti-corbyn could be open and honest enough to recognise the media did inflate the issue (not the impact to any one person) and that certain figures/factions used it as part of a political strategy then debate in here would benefit from it. There's too much factionalism and hypocrisy for open and honest engagement.

Even the Corbyn thread will provide hundreds of examples of it being escalated too far. It's also important to recognise the escalations in themselves caused harm.

Ah yes, the media - always a reliable recourse for corbynites who can't take responsibility for their own actions.

I don't think the media inflated the issue per se. I think much of that was about the media enjoying the hypocrisy of an avowedly anti racist party allowing antisemitism to take root, and being too up their own arses to recognise it. Corbyn turned Labour antisemitism into a story and kept it there all by himself.
 
Ah yes, the media - always a reliable recourse for corbynites who can't take responsibility for their own actions.

I don't think the media inflated the issue per se. I think much of that was about the media enjoying the hypocrisy of an avowedly anti racist party allowing antisemitism to take root, and being too up their own arses to recognise it. Corbyn turned Labour antisemitism into a story and kept it there all by himself.

Proving my point. Bravo
 
Ah yes, the media - always a reliable recourse for corbynites who can't take responsibility for their own actions.

I don't think the media inflated the issue per se. I think much of that was about the media enjoying the hypocrisy of an avowedly anti racist party allowing antisemitism to take root, and being too up their own arses to recognise it. Corbyn turned Labour antisemitism into a story and kept it there all by himself.
Those are some world class mental gymnastics, fair play.
 
“the media” isn’t a single entity though. Of course the right leaning media jump over any story which will discredit a Labour leader. That’s what they do. Any left leaning politician will need to negotiate this scrutiny. That’s just the way it is.

Corbyn made a pig’s ear of the whole debacle which gave them more and more column inches on the same topic. Shooting fish in a barrel.

Starmer’s gone in hard on antisemitism to try to defuse this angle of attack. And, as a result, is in the process of making antisemitism a less easy/obvious stick for “the media” to beat Labour with. Politics 101.
 
“the media” isn’t a single entity though. Of course the right leaning media jump over any story which will discredit a Labour leader. That’s what they do. Any left leaning politician will need to negotiate this scrutiny. That’s just the way it is.

Corbyn made a pig’s ear of the whole debacle which gave them more and more column inches on the same topic. Shooting fish in a barrel.

Starmer’s gone in hard on antisemitism to try to defuse this angle of attack. And, as a result, is in the process of making antisemitism a less easy/obvious stick for “the media” to beat Labour with. Politics 101.
Except for the fact that he's now being label an antisemite sympathizer?
 
Who? Starmer? I guess that label comes with the territory as the Labour leader. He seems to already be a hell of a lot less problematic than Corbyn re antisemitism anyway. Which is a good start.
What he's done is admitted to working under a "known antisemite" for years, only now, when it's politically convenient, taking issue with it. He's signed his own death warrant as far as this issue goes.
 
What he's done is admitted to working under a "known antisemite" for years, only now, when it's politically convenient, taking issue with it. He's signed his own death warrant as far as this issue goes.

Hmmm. Not sure about that. We’d need to see polls but I’d say there’s a very good chance he’s perceived as being far less antisemitic than his predecessor. To be clear, I’m not convinced Corbyn was an antisemite but he was useless at countering that perception.