UKH

I thought this was never going to go well but such a result 2 days in is super impressive even for Derek and raises serious questions about the political sense of those who decided to let him back in.  How many more self placed banana skins like this before Labour stop slipping and realise they need to convince moderate swing votors that they are a serious political force worthy of government (so they can be elected to that position).

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/20/derek-hatton-suspended-fro...

Minor slip up.

Let him back in, take the publicity and then......woops.

Leopards, spots. I have a suspicion that the whole of his public life has been a consequence of failing to get the parental attention he thought he merited when he was a child.  In that respect, I don't think there's too much distance between him and Boris Johnson.

T.

Now suspended from the labour party.

Not seen it but apparently an old tweet was anti-Semitic.

Probably worth mentioning that one of the greatest TV series ever  produced is available on All4. Alan Bleasdale’s GBH.

“Jewish people with any sense of humanity need to start speaking out publicly against the ruthless murdering being carried out by Israel!”

He looks great for 71 if that picture is up to date. 

I thought that as well, but otherwise still a knob.

Never saw that coming....

not

Almost to underline why the 8 left. Labour is becoming SWP whilst the Tories are quickly morphing into UKIP 

That immediately sprang to mind as soon as I heard in on Radio 4 yesterday,  Great series.  I'll jump on All4 tonight and watch it again!

I'm no fan of Hatton, and will be glad if he goes back to the sidelines, but should that (6 year old) tweet be worthy of suspension? You can definitely interpret it as blaming Jewish people everywhere for the actions of Israel, but it doesn't seem totally outrageous.

“British Muslims with any sense of humanity need to start speaking out publicly against the ruthless murdering being carried out by ISIS!” This seems to be stated by a wide range of commentators after every atrocity.

Funny you should make that remark about British Muslims. I started to write the exact same thing, last night, but deleted it. Not sure why, probably because that circle has been talked round quite a few times on here. 

I've got a grudging admiration for Hatton (mainly for just being an awkward sod and hopefully causing Maggie a few headaches).

And I think you're right in as much as the Jewish issue is to the Left as the Muslim/terrorist issue is to the Right. I'm comfortable for there to be commentary or conversation on both issues. When it becomes an excuse for the 'send 'em all back' brigade, that's when it takes a turn for the worse and that seems to be a prominent problem for the Right. 

There is a huge difference in context that can’t be forgotten: anti-semitism is a long-running stain on humanity that has historically involved targeted ideologies, extensive persecution, and ultimately the Holocaust. That’s not to deny that Muslims have been persecuted too at times (see China today) but moral equivalence here is at very least tricky. 

Oh I agree. And I'm not sure it's ever helpful to try and balance equivalence, or suggest one atrocity is better/worse than another (which I don't for one minute think you're doing).

I do think that there is a parallel with the unease which many people feel when talking about Islam/Israel/race/immigration. There are problems associated with all those topics. 

Personally and politically I don't think that the Labour party is anti-semitic. It might have members who are I don't know. Conversely the Tory party might have some racists but I don't think the party wanting to talk about immigration makes them a racist party. 

(Edit: the dislike wasn't me). 

Hatton seems to be a complete knob.

however, analysing his statement I think it is a bit of a knee jerk reaction to call this an anti semitic remark simply because it mentions Jews. anti semitism is defined as "hostile to or prejudiced against Jews."

his remark seems to suggest that all Jews everywhere are responsible for, or have some sway over the policies of a country that they may never even have been to. this is a stupid statement, but in  what way is it "hostile" to Jews?

It may well be that he is anti semitic and this remark needs to be seen in context, but purely based on the wording, it seems like a bit of an over reaction, which, as ever with these things, in fact dilutes the issue and distracts from statements/ behaviour that truly is anti semitic

So how long can people denigrate Muslims (if your saying the comment by Hatton was anti-Semitic) before that statement becomes equivalent.

It's hardly anti-Semitic is it? Really, it mentions Jews, but that's about it.

Wasn't Hatton involved in some corruption? If he was surely that's more of a reason to keep him out rather than a 6 year old tweet, which is arguably true, and at worst no more than we've seen on here, and in the rest of the media, about Muslims (without the thread being pulled)

And for a little context, Israel were bombing Gaza on a daily basis when he posted that tweet, over 2,000 people we killed and around 500 of them were children.

 I can see certain parallels in that there are some on the right who would probably like to develop a full-blown ideology around hatred of Muslims, but I would say anti-semitism is a much more developed and concrete problem in that it has been adopted by successive religions and ideologies, has a persistent nationalist and fascist connection, and has been a thread through history since the Romans. 

I don't think the Labour Party is institutionally anti-semitic but there is evidence of a nasty tendency that way amongst some of its members, and the Party under Corbyn has not done a good job of dealing with this.

I didn't say anything about Hatton's tweet. I was responding to Stuart.

Hatton's tweet was close to the bone and didn't take any regard of the sensitivities around the issue of antisemitism. If he'd left out the 'with any sense of humanity' he'd probably have been ok, but the implication there is that there aren't any, or many, Jewish people with a sense of humanity, which is a bit too close to the sub-human anti-semitic trope.

Oh, quick edit, I forgot to mention your 'whataboutery'. It's irrelevant. 

But isn't that part of the problem, not saying something that would be OK to say about any other group, singles one group out for special treatment.

Remember this is before the media frenzy over the Labour party being the hiding place for anti-Semites, and like I said it was around the time Israel was bombing Gaza, so a little context goes a long way.

to paraphrase Hatton “All people with any sense of humanity need to start speaking out publicly against the ruthless murdering being carried out by Israel!”

I'm not convinced "Jewish people with a sense of humanity, which is a bit too close to the sub-human anti-semitic trope.", is any trope at all. As with all people there will be people with a sense of humanity and some without. Isn't this just a call for those who have a sense of humanity to make their voices heard. Those who don't care are hardly likely to speak out about it are they?

Degsy's supposed corruption was the subject of a huge police investigation in the 90s called Operation Cheetah but the investigation ended with no evidence being found. He claims that the investigation was politically motivated.

There is the problem. You have to analyse to find fault.  The obsession of our time.

What are you talking about? Sounds like you're in the 'this country's had enough of experts' camp. We need more thought, not less.

I expect David Riley can speak for himself, but it rather sounds like he is in the "this country's had enough of people finding offence at the slightest thing (in order to further their own agenda)" camp. I certainly am

I'm not finding offence at all. And I don't have any agenda to further here. Got anything useful to contribute?

He's saying you can fault affront to anything if you look hard enough. A simple statement can be made to read what people, with an agenda, what it to make, rather than taking things at face value.

Edit: sorry dh73, looks like we've post the same point.

I didn't say you had. I am talking about the people who declared his twitter comment to be anti semitic

Maybe you can find offence anywhere, but tweets about Israel and the Jews just can't be simple statements any more. It's a minefield (probably not the best metaphor actually...). I just think people should take care. 

Cheers, I wasn't sure the outcome, probably shows, "chuck enough muck as someone and they'll appear dirty, to everyone."

I thought you meant me. As a general point I know that there is a tendency for people to be hypersensitive but there are also people going out of their way to be offensive. It's a toxic combination - they feed each other. In the middle of all that we need to keep a clear head and be thoughtful. Not always easy in the headlong rush of online argument and debate. 

Why not, unless you saying any criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic, which it plainly isn't, then why should Israel be a "special" case, and should we let anything Israel does go unchallenged, because that's where your statement ends up.

And surely this is what Israel would like to happen, therefore, we're playing into their hands aren't we?

I said "Israel and the Jews'. Not 'Israel or the Jews'. Maybe read more carefully?

Such a post on here would normally have a hundred 'likes' and many stronger follow-ups within a day of any particular newsworthy atrocity.

I've no knowledge of the man, his past or views so I won't comment specifically on him but there are some serious double standards at play in 21st C Britain. Seems to me he picked the wrong 'ism'.

jk

Not quite true though is it? The investigation ended with the Police charging him (on the basis that there was sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction and that it was in the public interest) and running an 8 week trial (during which certain charges were dismissed by the Judge due to insufficient evidence but the remaining counts allowed to continue) after which he was found not guilty by a jury who had been deliberating for 7 hours. He did claim the investigation was politically motivated.

But the Tweet was from 6 years ago, so how can he be retroactively as careful as we are supposed to be in today?

And instead of insisting he's anti-Semitic because of what he wrote, maybe ask him? This is where we are today, with people frightened to open their mouths to defend a brutalised people, because we're frighted of offending someone. The actual offence is ignored and, more often than not, it ends up a battle of semantics, rather than anything useful.

This is where the often too quick to judge, anti-Semitic accusations have lead, one side are frightened to say owt while it's emboldened the real anti-Semites because they think there's more of them than there actually are.

I agree up to a point, in that sensitivities were a little less heightened then. But it’s perfectly possible to defend the Palestinian people without being seen to be antisemitic, and I haven’t seen any evidence that people are frightened to open their mouths. 

And you seem to be already convinced his tweet was anti-Semitic.

That should be true, and can be, but what usually happens is people defending Palestinian rights are often called anti-Semitic simply because of that. Indeed support for Palestinians is often equated to anti-Semitism.

I can voucher for this as it's happened more than once, personally.

While Tw*tton shouldn't be allowed within a mile of the party his tweet wasn't racist.

There was a very good hatchet job done on him in yesterday's Grauniad.

I was speaking to a mate about this last night, he was a member of militant in the 80's.....he said Hatton could be really nice or not but he was never financially on the make....

Vouch not voucher, although maybe that's an option, anti-Semite vouchers ! Proceeds to charity

I worked with Degsy and saw him in action at close quarters. He could be charming at one moment and a thug the next. But I never saw any evidence of him being corrupt.

Who actually says that? People say that some anti-Zionists are anti-semitic, which is not the same thing.

I was going suggest a similar comparison using Irish Americans and the IRA.  Back in the 80s such views were often heard.  

However, I was too busy to draft it carefully enough to risk it!

I've had it said to me numerous times. I've seen it said to other people too.

I've had a bloke tell me that 200,000 pro Palestinian marchers were ALL anti-Semites, even though a good number of them were Jews!

Come on the next march, March 30th, with me and you'll more than likely find out.

I've had it said to me on here too.

So just anecdotal evidence then? 

well yes if you like, I might be lying or I might have simply made it up. Like I said, come with us on 30th March, and see what happens.

I might even have a photo of some bloke with a placard pointing to the marchers with "anti-Semites" written on it.

Or read a few pro-Palestine web site, with message boards, you'll soon get the facts.

I'm just surprised you can't find anything else.

You look for it, I'm not that bothered or come with us in March.

frankly I don't care if you believe me or not, I doubt you'd be convinced if I showed you a movie, but never mind, you entitled to think what you want to.

Of course I'd be convinced if you showed me genuine evidence. I'm agnostic on this so there's no need to be sarcastic.

Trouble with left politics is, it attracts chancers. Range Rover driving, pony owning, upper middle class, (nouveau or inherited) tw*ts.

a bit of research should clarify who I might mean.

Perfect description of Farage. (Fixed). 

Well if we say it enough then it will be true.

obviosly there are no other parties that are attractive to the monied.

Sorry if your being ironic, so hard to tell nowadays

you get all sorts of idiots sprouting recieved wisdom they saw on a Facebook meme.

You need watch your spell-checker. It has replaced 'argumentative' with 'agnostic'.

I've no idea what you're suggesting...

Watching George Galloway on SKY news, he is applying to re join too. Broad church?

It's probably only being well known that has kept him out. The Respect  trade unionists I knew best are back in Labour as are about half those I knew in the SWP. These people are way to the left of Corbyn and the original Momentum group and while they remain they will cause chaos in local constituencies with a disimilar MP or Councillor and will, with their ideological bullying, destroy Labour's long term electoral chances. The only reason the party stands a chance right now is ordinary people don't go to party meetings. My MP Chris Leslie was a good Labour MP of the sort the party desperately needed to appeal to swing voters and these far left activists hate him as he stood up to them and now with no sense of irony openly call him a effing traitor, even though their main focus had been on getting rid of him ( a massive distraction from real local issues).

More on Liverpool

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/23/liverpool-wavertree-labour-...

Read that article last night. Really depressing somehow.

I read it just now. A minor aspect bothers me:

"Clare McIntyre, one of Labour’s three councillors in Wavertree, told me that she dreaded going to party meetings because she had been subjected to a campaign of harassment. Though an avowed socialist who has twice voted for Corbyn, she says she has fallen foul of the Momentum group which, according to her, has a stranglehold on the CLP executive ...

"Off Wavertree’s rundown high street is Sandown Lane, a beautiful tree-lined street with large Georgian houses that seem to inhabit a different universe to the main road just yards away. It’s also home to the local party headquarters.

“Needless to say,” McIntyre told me, “it’s where most of the activists on the left live.”

What exactly is that 'needless to say' supposed to be implying here? And is it in fact true that 'most of the activists on the left' live in one particular street?

I'd agree it looks a bit cliched but it would be an understandable concern if intellectual socialists living in nice houses were more interested in internationalist issues than severe local deprivation just down the road.

Watching Tom Watson on Andrew Marr he seems to get it. Unless things change in Labour they will lose the social democratic wing and damage their electability. The harshness of the hard left towards those who left also needs to stop, especially some of the language on social media. He is rightly standing up for pluralism in the party.

A more unkind view on George

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/feb/22/country-needs-tom-han...

Is this not just a publicity stunt? 

"Hey, Jezza old pal, I hear you have a problem with antisemitism. Let me help you out. You let me back in the party, unearth this quote then chuck me out again. I get some publicity to help with my forthcoming An Evening with Degsy tour and you are seen to be tough on antisemitism. "

It all makes sense to me. 

"The harshness of the hard left towards those who left also needs to stop..." Dream on-these people are fanatical headbangers for whom ideological purity is the only thing that matters. My crystal ball is not what it was, but the trickle of MP's who have had enough and thrown in the towel could become a flood.

Being as I suspect I may be...rather prejudiced, instinct tells me (plus a bit of memory) that Degsy might be viewed as a bit unsavoury. But then, it's probably just me....the hypocritical bastard

As for anti-semitism, I'm not so sure.

isms are the new evil. Public enemy number one. Flung about with abandon by intolerant folk, making the world of ordinary people yet more intolerant

By harshness do you mean people calling for a by-election?

You're convinced what he Tweeted 6 years ago was anti-Semitic then?

Or is this simply a "keep the anti-Semitic fire burning under Labour" story? How far back can we go and tie tenuous comments to the Labour party?

There's obviously anti-Semitism in the Labour party, there's anti-Semitism in society, but please let's get some perspective here, otherwise we're doing a disservice to real anti-Semitism and people's fight against that.

The problem is that if you examine Degsy's quote he doesn't attack the Israeli government for their brutal reaction to rocket attacks and border incidents, which most people, including me, would agree with but talks about 'Jewish people with any sense of humanity' which implies that there are some/many Jewish people with no sense of humanity - a variation on the historical trope of 'The Evil Jew'. A bit ambiguous, true, but how about Alex Scott-Samuel, the chair of the local Labour Party in Luciana Berger's constituency and former Liverpool Uni academic, who has publicly repeated the 'Rothschild Conspiracy' a long discredited anti-Jewish conspiracy theory. What was he an academic in, 'reading the Beano'? (It was public health, actually)

The problem with your analysis is that five years ago, we didn't have to be so careful with our language, and that Israel itself was promoting it's actions as protecting the Jewish people. It would still be vague, and a stretch to read it as meaning what you've proposed as anti-Semitism, it could be read both ways so it's open to interpretation. Times have changed and possibly he might have re-phrased it nowadays ( i don't really know if he's anti-Semitic or not), but it shows the state of the times we live in, where a tweet from 6 years ago is, "evidence" and that's the best and most recent thing we can come up with to prove it.

The statement implies there are Jews without a sense of humanity, but replace the word Jewish with "All" and see how it reads then, there's no doubt it's true. Some people have humanity and some don't, there's a subset of any group of people that could apply to.

Wow, has someone hacked your account

Agreed, Degsy's 6 year old statement was ambiguous and open to interpretation and, by itself, hardly cast iron proof of anti-semitism - unlike the public statements from prominent members of the Liverpool Labour Party. To me, expressing public support for the Rothschild conspiracy theory is amazing.

I'd say the original Tweet is basically a mirror of "You Muslims need to rein your sort in and stop terrorism", which is really an equally stupid statement.

It is anti-Semitic (by blaming Jews more widely for the poor domestic and foreign policies of the Israeli state) but it's by no means the worst I've seen.

Agreed.

I don't see it as blaming anyone, simply a plea to make your voice heard.

But we're not talking about them.

I don't know anything about them, so can't comment, from what you've said it sounds bad, but this thread was about Degsy and what he's being accused of.

Edit:

Here's what Scott has said. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dzi5VMzWkAIWide.jpg:Large

Don't think that link works try this and scroll down, he says he was misrepresented and is sorry https://twitter.com/buzhna?lang=en

Again I don't know if it's true or not.

It doesn't blame Jews for anything. You're making a judgement on what he's thinking.

Hardly. There are lots of people in the world that lack much empathy for their fellows. It seems reasonable to assume that Jews are no different in this respect than any other ethnic group.

It's along the same lines as telling me I need to get Theresa to sort Brexit out, something I'd love to do but simply is not within my legal power other than writing a letter which wouldn't get read or waving a banner which would be ignored.

In essence, it's blaming Jews for the actions of Israel by suggesting they should sort it out when it is not within their powers to do this.

Are you sure it not simply asking for them to speak up? It's in everyone's power to do that surely.

Why should a Jew living in the UK (for example) speak out against the government of Israel? Would you expect every Muslim in Britain to speak out against the Saudi war in Yemen?

Well let look at your sentence above, you say "a" Jew and then every Muslim. Why do you suppose you put that?

That aside Degsy's tweet isn't demanding anything, it's asking for help, from those who have a voice for those that haven't.

And to answer your somewhat  strange question (if I've read it correctly), people should be speaking out against the Saudi war in Yemen, not just Muslims, but we're not discussing a Tweet where anyone has said that are we?

"need to speak out" = should let their views be known.

Not really an instruction more of a wish. It's a rather brash way of putting it but hardly placing the blame for Israel's actions on "Jews with any humanity".

And let's not remove the context of this Tweet,  Israeli's were bombing Gaza on a daily basis 2,000+ deaths and 500 of them children, at the time. So maybe just a cry for help.

Firstly that was what Tom said on the BBC. More from him today:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/25/tom-watson-says-he-will-mo...

The problem is very real according to some on the left in Labour 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/25/labour-has-widespread-prob...

Calling for a departing MP to stand for a byelection is a reasonable political position (that the MP is free to ignore).

Joining the party as a revolutionary socialist (something I regard as dishonest as it's  incompatible with Labour's broad values) and immediately working hard to get rid of your MP and then calling them a f*cking traitor on social media when they leave is what bugs me.

I checked the tweet and he does apologise but he refers to 'an article I read on the history of neoliberalism'. It can't have been a scholarly article if it endorsed the Rothschild conspiracy theory, which has been thoroughly debunked. More likely it was an article from some dodgy website shared on social media - with which facebook, for instance, is flooded at the moment. I'm just surprised that a so-called academic  in such a position could publicly endorse a conspiracy theory without checking it out.

To be fair, and following on from my post at 19.25, Jon Lansman in the second of the links admits that the recent surge in Labour Party membership has included some undesirables who push Jewish conspiracy theories. 

I don't think anyone has said there isn't a problem with anti-Semitism, or that it shouldn't be dealt with, my only issue is it's not the preserve of the Labour party, it's a scourge within society. The media only seem interested in anti-Semitism within the Labour party, when we should be dealing with the problem as a whole.

The thread was about Hatton and a Tweet from 6 years ago in which he mentions Jews, doesn't mean he's anti-Semitic, especially given the context at the time.

They can ignore it if they have no conscience, you're right.

Isn't Labour supposed to be a broad church, revolutionary socialist or not?

I think you'd also need to define revolutionary, Corbyn has been put into that category by some commentators. Nye Bevan's NHS was revolutionary, wasn't it?  Which bit are you complaining about by the way, the revolutionary bit or the socialist bit?

I agree the language is a bit strong, but I'm not sure who you're referring to that said that. Working class language shouldn't really be a surprise for a working class party though, should it.

Since I haven't read it, I wouldn't know, I'm assuming you haven't either, so really neither of us know what the article was about or the context in which he referenced it, which sort of makes neither of us valid critics, I'd say.

That's not an adequate response to the problem. It fails to address the fact that the Labour leadership has been woefully inadequate when it comes to dealing with complaints of anti-Semitism within the party. Trying to deflect attention by simply treating it as a widescale societal issue does not exonerate the party of its failing. Even Jon Lansman has admitted there is a problem. If the Labour Party cannot be seen to be dealing with an internal issue of this nature, it is hard to see how it can persuade sufficient numbers of voters in the wider electorate that it is party worthy of their votes. 

Even Jon Lansman, what does that mean? Is he not allowed to be against racism, because he's for Momentum. That 's a very prejudiced statement.

I'm sure Labour could have done a better job, and I'm not dismissing it, but it is a very small number of members who've been reported 0.1%, while 1 person is bad enough, it's not the nest of vipers we're lead to believe it is. The bloke who sent Lucinda a bucketful of hate filled anti-Semitic posts wasn't even a Labour supporter, as it turned out. Like I said anti-Semitism has no place in society or any political party.

It's a good thing there'll taking it more seriously, it'll hopefully prevent the media storm distracting from policy too,  which isn't a bad thing.

Oh do stop playing the victim! Jon Lansman, as you well know, is a senior figure in Momentum and is an influential figure in the same Labour leadership which has been woefully inadequate in dealing with the issue. He is a member of the NEC, which has been woefully inadequate in dealing with the issue. 

If you do are not dismissing it, you are doing a good job of appearing to try to brush it under the carpet. It's simply not good enough. 

I don't think it is particularly deeply ingrained in society generally, though it may be in some circles.  Anti-Islamic views are certainly much more widespread.

There you go typifiying the attitudes that the departing MPs were worried about. You say they have no conscience (as they certainly won't stand for byelections immediately, and they say out of conscience, so they can avoid dispruption and still vote for what they believed in). Antisemitism is overblown . Revolutionary socialists are seemingly OK in Labour (you know what I mean by that as I specified ex SWP). Then the old lie implying socialism is the problem with such MPs (it never was).

Seeing as he didn't identify the article and I'm not Mystic Mog I can hardly check it out can I? He did say they he learned about the Rothschild conspiracy theory from it. Seeing as that conspiracy theory has been thoroughly debunked, as a senior member of the local Labour party it was exceedingly daft of him to refer to it publicly. I'd say that was a valid criticism.

Then why shouldn't he speak up about it? You talk about him as if he's not expected to speak up about it, everyone should, how many times do I have to say it?

See above FFS!

If they'd run off to join the BNP, that would be OK with you would it? and they'd still be representing their constituents?

When did you specify ex SWP? And so what you don't think people can change their views at any point in their lives, I know sweet FA about the bloke, so I'm not likely to condemn him on your say so am I?

MP's can legally defect to whom they like as long as the party is legal but I cant see any possible chance of a Labour MP going over to the BNP (there were exaggerated rumours of a couple of Labour MPs considering UKIP a couple of years back).

The question on where I mentioned the SWP (and others on the far left) joining Labour is weird... have you read the thread? They are not changing their minds they are waging a campaign to move Labour further left than it is now and they hate all social democrats in the party.

Latest:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/27/labour-suspends-chris-will...

MP's can legally defect to whom they like as long as the party is legal but I cant see any possible chance of a Labour MP going over to the BNP (there were exaggerated rumours of a couple of Labour MPs considering UKIP a couple of years back).

The question on where I mentioned the SWP (and others on the far left) joining Labour is weird... have you read the thread? They are not changing their minds they are waging a campaign to move Labour further left than it is now and they hate all social democrats in the party.

Latest:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/27/labour-suspends-chris-will...

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/corbyn-did-all-he-could-to-stop-chri...

The worrying thing about this is that Chris Williamson, a Labour MP, expressed public support for suspended Labour party member Jackie Walker who has supported the 'Jews responsible for sugar/slave trade conspiracy theory' which, in a similar way to the 'Rothschild conspiracy theory' supported by Wavertree Labour Party members, has been well debunked (Google them if you don't believe me). Until recently I was sceptical of the charges of anti-Semitism in the Labour Party, basically because I'd never come across it, despite knowing several members. I'm beginning to question things now.

Latest..

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/05/margaret-hodge-corbyn-misl...

Plus a new opinion piece...

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/04/labour-antisemitism-p...

I have to say that Jennie Formby's reaction to Tom Watson's attempt to make real progress with ensuring complaints of antisemitism are taken seriously seems rather ominous. 

Her response to complaints of inaction and lack of transparency seems to be to prevent the deputy leader from doing anything or being kept informed.  

Jennie is rather stuck in the middle though, trying to maintain due process in a party structure whist the members are seemingly at war with each other. The crazy investigation delays and biggest inappropriate decisions were made before her time. Still I'd agree things don't look good..

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/04/labour-general-secretary-f...

I don't know much about Jackie, but isn't she Jewish? (Not that that means she can't be anti-Semitic)

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/lynching-of-jackie-walker/

There's a lot of info here too, I don't know what to make of it all, and haven't got time to read it all. I suspect though even if I did, I'd be non the wiser. There seems to be a determination with the media to paint Labour as the new Nazi party. I tend to think there's a good mix, similar to society itself. So ye there will be some racist in the party, and they should be expelled, the problem is they're not always easy to spot. And not everything were being asked to believe is the truth.

https://freespeechonisrael.org.uk/tag/momentum/

This roots of this situation are from five or six years ago, where any criticism of Israel was considered anti-Semitism, some still support this view today. What happened because of this was "real" anti-Semitism has been diluted, the waters have been muddied, and people are being accused of all sorts of stuff. Some deserve it, others don't and there are some who simply make daft mistakes.

Just to add, the bombardment of Luciana Berger is disgusting and nobody deserves what she has to put up with, even this though has been reported as from Labour members, while the people who have been arrested so far haven't been associated with Labour.

It goes back a long time before that. There has been a nasty strain of hard left anti-Semitism for a long time. Have a look at this:

https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/08/21/labours-new-anti-semitism-has-disturbi...

It is difficult to discover the truth in a world of false news, conspiracy theories and dodgy websites secretly funded by governments (and Israel is no doubt one). Incidentally, opendemocracy is a bona fide site so good work there. Jackie Walker seems to have an obsession with slavery - which is fair enough given her background - but the consensus on the 'Jews funded the sugar/slave trade conspiracy theory' is that Jewish involvement in this trade (and there was some) was no more than other groups in society (google it if you don't believe me). So to say, as she did, that Jews were responsible for a 'slave holocaust' is simply wrong and about as anti-Semitic as claiming that the Jews undermined Germany in the First World War. The key thing is to always check the source of any controversial article before sharing it on social media.

Don't need to Google it, there's an interesting map of people who made money out of slavery, mostly from compensation for when we banned it. Many clergy made wads of cash out of it.

I'm not sure if I'm right about Jackie's comments but, if not sure she blamed the Jews for the "slavery holocaust" I thought, and I might be wrong, she was pointing out that Holocaust Day, is supposed to remember all genocides / mass murders, and that fact they had a cut off date which precluded the deaths from mainly African slaves, was where she was coming from. She was also complaining about the focus of holocaust day being mainly about the Jews when it wasn't supposed to be solely about Jewish deaths but about mass murders regardless of religion or race.

Like I said, I don't know enough her or what she said to really comment, defend or condemn her.

There does seem to be a shocking amount of here-say about though and very little hard evidence.

Meanwhile this got very little publicity, and seems to be their plan coming to fruition.

youtube.com/watch?v=buFz_zkSHqs&

Shai Masot

There's a four part documentary, but I've not had a chance to watch it yet.

You are reverting to your knuckle-dragging days when your schtick was copying and pasting rants about Sussex FOI. How on Earth you came to be reading their Twitter feed remains beyond me. Well, I do know, but you get what I mean.

Jackie, is it? Like Madonna, first names and all that. Trolling Jews on an international memorial day established on anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz was first rate bollocks and you should both know this and begin to think a little more about the pap you read and regurgitate. 

Sussex FOI, are you sure about this, the name doesn't ring a bell?  My search for information doesn't stop at the Daily Mail though, so there's always a possibility you might be right, who knows?

Mike, what's wrong with first names?

Besides that, we were discussing a specific person, your bile seems to know no bounds and reading "something" into my use of Jackie, rather than Jacqueline Walker, shows exactly how something innocuous can be blown out of all proportion.

You disagree with a particular point and yet chose to lambaste me for using "the wrong" name. It's indicative of the times we're living in, and the faux outrage at benign conversations, with all the inferences you're trying to make.

You might not like what she said, but you don't think she was making a valid point, where is the commemoration of the slaves that died building America and making a lot of people rich?

I take it you know Jackie(oops), is Jewish?

Would you rather there was no discussion around this?

I for one learnt something which I didn't know before, and which sort of supports what Jackie (sorry I've done it again) was talking about, namely Holocaust Memorial Day, wasn't only about the Jews.

From the website; "Holocaust Memorial Day Trust (HMDT) encourages remembrance in a world scarred by genocide. We promote and support Holocaust Memorial Day (HMD) – the international day on 27 January to remember the six million Jews murdered during the Holocaust, the millions of people killed under Nazi Persecution and in subsequent genocides in Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia and Darfur."

I notice you completely ignored the bit about Masot, where we have context and video evidence of what was actually said, not third-hand reports and sound bites.

Don't fret about it too much.

According to the attitudes expressed on the thread about conservative islamaphobia, there's no point in accommodating religious fanatics like Mike. They can just bugger off back to where they came from.

Careful with the irony Not every one gets it. I think he's already in Highbury, anyhow

I realise I'm pissing against the wind, but ...... we live in hope, don't we?

That fact my using "Jackie", inferred so much to Mike (there I've done it again), is not only baffling but surprising. It's no wonder we're in the state we're in if this can be so offensive. Claim and counter claim, and outrage, how do we get past this sort of shite, and deal with real issues and real disrespect.

Well call me old fashioned but I would expect the normal reaction of any progressive party would be to investigate and side with any victims, rather than going into denial and tolerating extremists harassing the complainents.  At least the tories, being mostly non-progressive, have an excuse. A muslim tory on R4 about 8.30am today explained the institutional racism point very well... it's not that most people in the party are islamophobic,  it's that the institution structurally failed to deal properly with many complaints, especially when the complaint was about the behaviour of high ranked members).

Latest

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/06/corbyn-staff-asked-to-be-c...

Even in the light of Masot?

I agree but many accusations have turned out to be nothing to do with the Labour party, and a good number have been so open to interpretation (as is quite often the case with AS).

What do you want suspend every MPs that gets accused, and reinstate after investigation, there has to be some balance.

You exaggerate and deflect again. I mainly expect complaints to be taken seriously and process to be followed properly without undue delay or iinterference, and victims to be treated with sympathy (not hate).   Some of the nasty barking extremists on social media and local meetings do need to be expelled (the SWP,  and too many Respect and Militant types simply do not share Labour ideals).. Labour learnt this the hard way before and now need to start all over again. 

The tories must be delighted with this ongoing shambles...

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/07/labour-antisemitism-equali...

The issue is, as per the thread title, that this wonderful new Corbyn Labour Party isn't really Labour at all. It is a faction of the party which has no interest in being a broad church. As such it has attracted the Hattons, the SWP adherents, the leftist bigots, frankly, who would never ordinarily get a look in, led by a man who has precious little in common with the thousands of young people who have flocked to join the party. 

One day, they too will hopefully look back and think what a good thing it was that the party finally came to its senses and expelled the lot of them. 

Where?