Anti semetism

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Jun 03, 2019 8:26 pm

android wrote: Also, in this thread, you agreed with an example of a Labour supporter being called out for blatant antisemitism. But guess what happened to that person? You guessed right - he/she was suspended. Compare and contrast with the instant expulsion of lifelong Labour supporter for voting Liberal for the sole purpose of supporting a 2nd ref. Funny that.

I've been critical of that already. It's ridiculous, but the Labour party having a more decisive policy when faced with a clear admission on national TV of what they consider wrongdoing is not evidence of antisemitism from Jeremy ******* Corbyn.

android · Post by **android** » Mon Jun 03, 2019 9:17 pm

It is evidence of Corbyn's high tolerance of antisemitism from people who share his world view.

Regarding the wreathes - there were 2. One for victims of Israeli strikes and one for the terrorists. Corbyn admitted being there for the laying of both wreathes in the Morning Star on his return from the wreath laying. When the story broke more recently Corbyn initially denied being present for the terrorist wreath laying - he must have forgotten about his Morning Star piece. But then the photo of him holding the wreath next to the terrorists graves emerged and he then changed his story to the farcical "I was present but I don't think I was involved". I say it's farcical but you will probably now tell me that you believe him! It's a waste of my time to be honest because you will only see what you want to see.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Jun 03, 2019 10:25 pm

android wrote:It is evidence of Corbyn's high tolerance of antisemitism from people who share his world view.

...

Yep.

Now is that the same as "Corbyn's antisemitism", which is what you accused me of refusing to see? It is not.

If you want to call him an antisemite then by all means go for it. I disagree based on the available evidence. Like you i think he is too tolerant of such views but then so are other party leaders and i'm not about to claim that Theresa May is racist because she seems to tolerate islamophobes and antisemites in her party. In fact many of the people being ejected and suspended by the Labour party were party of the party under previous leaders, so are we about to call Ed Miliband, Gordon Brown and Tony Blair antisemites too for their tolerance of these people in their party? Of course not.

Maybe i'm wrong. Maybe Corbyn is an antisemite, but i think it's pretty unfair for you to accuse me of "refusing to see" evidence of it when the evidence doesn't seem to exist yet. And that's the only real problem I had with your post earlier. Don't' accuse me of **** that I've not done, if it's not too much trouble. K? Thanks.

android · Post by **android** » Mon Jun 03, 2019 11:27 pm

I don't agree that my criticism was unfair but you would win more support on here if you debated the way you just have more often rather than how you went about it earlier. But then your output on here is phenomenal so I couldn't keep it going to be honest.

Maybe now that you know Corbyn did indeed lay a wreath for the terrorists, you might see his defence of the mural in a different (more realistic!) light and also his comments about British Jews and also his extraordinary tolerance of antisemitism and a pattern might emerge. Maybe not. Goodnight.

South West Claret. · Post by **South West Claret.** » Wed Jun 05, 2019 9:25 pm

Tories at it again, more muck spreading of course https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48536402" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Fri Jun 07, 2019 7:47 am

New MP in Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party, Lisa Forbes being interviewed about her engagement in anti-semitic posts on social media.

https://twitter.com/addicted2newz/statu ... 3021264897" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

She explains that she had liked the threads and tweets all accidentally.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Jun 07, 2019 7:50 am

Brexit Party blaming the Pakistani vote for losing in Peterborough.

Who knew they were a bunch of bigots eh?

Who knew?

(this seems to be the thread to put incidents of racism in politics on)

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Fri Jun 07, 2019 7:57 am

More details of the accusations of anti-semitism against the brand new MP in Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... tisemitism" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

AndrewJB · Post by **AndrewJB** » Fri Jun 07, 2019 8:26 am

android wrote:I don't agree that my criticism was unfair but you would win more support on here if you debated the way you just have more often rather than how you went about it earlier. But then your output on here is phenomenal so I couldn't keep it going to be honest.

Maybe now that you know Corbyn did indeed lay a wreath for the terrorists, you might see his defence of the mural in a different (more realistic!) light and also his comments about British Jews and also his extraordinary tolerance of antisemitism and a pattern might emerge. Maybe not. Goodnight.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/blogs.spec ... mitic/amp/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck ... wreath-row" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In the interest of this debate.

Erasmus · Post by **Erasmus** » Fri Jun 07, 2019 9:37 am

The accusation of racism is based on the words 'Zionist slave masters agenda'. I don't like this kind of extreme language but I can't see how it can categorised as racist. I know I have been going on about this point for some time, but as yet no one, not even Rowls, has been able to explain how unpleasant statements of this type can be defined as racism. And it is that point that defines this whole debate.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Jun 07, 2019 9:41 am

Okay, do you think a UK political figure (like an MP) should be using the language "Zionist slave masters agenda"?

I don't, and I'm pretty sure its anti-semitic.

Greenmile · Post by **Greenmile** » Fri Jun 07, 2019 9:57 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Brexit Party blaming the Pakistani vote for losing in Peterborough.

Who knew they were a bunch of bigots eh?

Who knew?

(this seems to be the thread to put incidents of racism in politics on)

No no no. This is a thread for smearing Jeremy Corbyn and nothing else.

If you want to discuss the many incidents of actual racism that the Brexit Party, UKIP, or the Tories are guilty of, you need to start another thread, which Rowls will then pop up on to defend the racists.

Erasmus · Post by **Erasmus** » Fri Jun 07, 2019 10:19 am

Lancaster, she liked it, she didn't use it, but no I don't think anyone should speak in these sort of terms. It is unpleasant and it does nothing to help the Palestinian cause; just the opposite.

But why is it to be classed as anti-semitic? Is it racist? To be racist surely it would have to be directed at the Jewish people as a race, and it isn't. Or are you making an inference of racist attitudes based on the extreme nature of the language used?

tiger76 · Post by **tiger76** » Fri Jun 07, 2019 10:27 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Okay, do you think a UK political figure (like an MP) should be using the language "Zionist slave masters agenda"?

I don't, and I'm pretty sure its anti-semitic.

Watched Lisa Forbes acceptance speech and her subsequent interview with "Brillo",dear god she is a dunce,and will no doubt toe the party line,how surprising from a Corbyn groupie,approval ratings of -55 for Jezza and yet the sheep still vote for a red rosette.

If i was a Labour supporter i'd be relieved more than triumphant this morning,yes they held the seat but only by the skin of their teeth,and notably the Lib Dem vote went up fourfold.

Surprisingly the Conservative vote held up better than expected,still over 20%,by-elections are notoriously difficult to critique and there was a plethora of candidates,in a GE i'd still expect a tight Labour/Conservative fight,But that's assuming a GE doesn't happen in the near future,neither of the main parties have the appetite to go to the country just now,but circumstances could rapidly change.

From the BP perspective they'll consider this a missed opportunity,this result however clearly shows voters will change their behaviour dependent on the type of election and the voting system,this is why an insurgent party will struggle to gain seats under FPTP.

IDK if the newly elected MP is anti-semitic or not,but whatever that language isn't appropriate for a public official,apparently she is seeking anitsemitism training,so this would suggest she realises her actions aren't befitting of a parliamentarian.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Jun 07, 2019 10:33 am

Erasmus wrote:Lancaster, she liked it, she didn't use it, but no I don't think anyone should speak in these sort of terms. It is unpleasant and it does nothing to help the Palestinian cause; just the opposite.

But why is it to be classed as anti-semitic? Is it racist? To be racist surely it would have to be directed at the Jewish people as a race, and it isn't. Or are you making an inference of racist attitudes based on the extreme nature of the language used?

Why did she like it though?

Too busy to read the comments? Then don't like it

Erasmus · Post by **Erasmus** » Fri Jun 07, 2019 10:53 am

I am not saying she did nothing wrong, just that the wrong she did is not to be defined as racism. That is the real point at issue. You say that you are pretty sure it is anti-semitic, hence racist, but what is racist in that statement? It is a bitter and unpleasantly-worded condemnation of Zionism, but that is not racism.

android · Post by **android** » Sat Jun 08, 2019 10:40 pm

Regarding your links Andrew:

The wreath link confirms what I said - unless you think the people killed in Paris by Mossad were innocent civilians and you think Corbyn just happened to catch the wreath beside the terrorists grave in Tunisia when he was on his way to the beach. Not the first time you have suspended reality when it comes to Corbyn.

The Spectator article originally posted by Rowls claims that it does not matter how tolerant Corbyn is of antisemitism, as this alone cannot make him antisemitic. I disagree. If it was not Corbyn, I think you would agree that the leader of one of our main parties (any party) has a duty to deal with racism and not seek ways of keeping racists in the party. The author also decides not to tackle the anti Zionism question, which is a pity, as it is probably the root cause of Corbyn's antisemitism problem. As much as Erasmus would like it to be a simple case of anti Zionism good, antisemitism bad, it really is not that simple.

And meanwhile Greenmile now seems to have done his research and decided that it is all a smear campaign. Hmmm

Greenmile · Post by **Greenmile** » Sat Jun 08, 2019 10:46 pm

android wrote:.And meanwhile Greenmile now seems to have done his research and decided that it is all a smear campaign. Hmmm

Eh?

Are you referring to this?

Greenmile wrote:No no no. This is a thread for smearing Jeremy Corbyn and nothing else.

If you want to discuss the many incidents of actual racism that the Brexit Party, UKIP, or the Tories are guilty of, you need to start another thread, which Rowls will then pop up on to defend the racists.

...because that only means I assume everything Rowls says about Corbyn is a smear (it was kind of a joke). Not everything everyone says.

android · Post by **android** » Sat Jun 08, 2019 11:12 pm

Alright. But you are kind of giving me the impression that you regard the foolish Lukaku body part song as more serious than spreading hatred of Jews. You have found find time to post about the former (think it was one of your links suggesting that Rowls was defending racists) but nothing about the latter - other than to suggest it is just a smear.

Greenmile · Post by **Greenmile** » Sat Jun 08, 2019 11:27 pm

android wrote:Alright. But you are kind of giving me the impression that you regard the foolish Lukaku body part song as more serious than spreading hatred of Jews. You have found find time to post about the former (think it was one of your links suggesting that Rowls was defending racists) but nothing about the latter - other than to suggest it is just a smear.

I think singing racist songs at the football is more unequivocally racist than criticising the state of Israel. I also think Rowls is a hypocrite. That’s all.

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Sat Jun 08, 2019 11:37 pm

Greenmile wrote:I think singing racist songs at the football is more unequivocally racist than criticising the state of Israel. I also think Rowls is a hypocrite. That’s all.

What about. What about

Greenmile · Post by **Greenmile** » Sat Jun 08, 2019 11:40 pm

Damo wrote:What about. What about

There’s a fair bit of context as to why the Lukaku chant is being mentioned on this thread, which you appear to have missed, and I can be bothered explaining.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Sat Jun 08, 2019 11:41 pm

Damo wrote:What about. What about

Damo: A man desperately trying to not have to think.

If you draw comparisons it's "whataboutism". If you make an argument based on decency and humanity it's "virtue-signalling".
The embodiment of anti-intellectualism.

Ironically he uses both terms incorrectly, because, well... let's just say that understanding the meaning of things isn't important to the anti-intellectuals.

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Sun Jun 09, 2019 10:02 am

Yet more allegations surfacing this morning.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... loyee.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

These are possibly the most mundane of the lot but they come directly from people who have worked for Rupa Huq.

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Sun Jun 09, 2019 11:01 am

Rowls wrote:Yet more allegations surfacing this morning.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... loyee.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

These are possibly the most mundane of the lot but they come directly from people who have worked for Rupa Huq.

Rowls, why do you keep posting these links when you yourself have very dubious opinions when it come to racism?

Its clearly obvious that you are just fishing when you say you are against all forms of racism.

taio · Post by **taio** » Sun Jun 09, 2019 11:08 am

Spijed wrote:Rowls, why do you keep posting these links when you yourself have very dubious opinions when it come to racism?

Its clearly obvious that you are just fishing when you say you are against all forms of racism.

Rowls is just posting evidence of anti-semitism in the Labour party which the OP was asking for. It's clear parts of the Labour party is anti-semitic. It's a disgrace.

android · Post by **android** » Sun Jun 09, 2019 11:27 am

Greenmile wrote:I think singing racist songs at the football is more unequivocally racist than criticising the state of Israel. I also think Rowls is a hypocrite. That’s all.

I wish you would make your mind up as to whether you have, or have not, looked into the antisemitism evidence about Corbyn and his party. Sounds like you have reached a conclusion again - it is nothing more than "criticising the state of Israel" - or was that just another joke?

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Sun Jun 09, 2019 3:28 pm

Spijed wrote:Rowls, why do you keep posting these links when you yourself have very dubious opinions when it come to racism?
Its clearly obvious that you are just fishing when you say you are against all forms of racism.

That's a load of nonsense Spijed, to put it politely.

I'm continuing to post these allegations because I said I would and it turns out they just keep coming.

When the thread started, a lot of people were very sceptical. Racism in the Labour party? No! Labour are the *good* guys.

But the allegations keep coming, against members, councillors, MPs and even the leader of the party, Jeremy Corbyn himself.

I speak out against racism whenever I can and wherever I see it. See the thread about the Rooney rule adopted by the EFL.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Sun Jun 09, 2019 3:37 pm

Rowls wrote:

I speak out against racism whenever I can and wherever I see it.

Do you ****.

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Sun Jun 09, 2019 3:55 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Damo: A man desperately trying to not have to think.

If you draw comparisons it's "whataboutism". If you make an argument based on decency and humanity it's "virtue-signalling".
The embodiment of anti-intellectualism.

Ironically he uses both terms incorrectly, because, well... let's just say that understanding the meaning of things isn't important to the anti-intellectuals.

Virtue signalling ~ "public, empty gestures intended to convey socially approved attitudes without any associated risk or sacrifice"

That pretty much sums you up Charlie.
I know you dont have the levels of introspection to see it, but that doesn't make my use of the term incorrect

AndyClaret · Post by **AndyClaret** » Sun Jun 09, 2019 4:19 pm

Damo wrote:Virtue signalling ~ "public, empty gestures intended to convey socially approved attitudes without any associated risk or sacrifice"

That pretty much sums you up Charlie.
I know you dont have the levels of introspection to see it, but that doesn't make my use of the term incorrect

The term was invented for the likes of him, he's seriously triggered by Trump but won't leave his bunker to protest. Says it all really.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Sun Jun 09, 2019 4:33 pm

Damo wrote:Virtue signalling ~ "public, empty gestures intended to convey socially approved attitudes without any associated risk or sacrifice"

That pretty much sums you up Charlie.
I know you dont have the levels of introspection to see it, but that doesn't make my use of the term incorrect

What "public, empty gestures" are you talking about?

Corky · Post by **Corky** » Sun Jun 09, 2019 4:41 pm

Funny old world we live in....

Semite.. a member of any of the peoples who speak or spoke a Semitic language, including in particular the Jews and Arabs.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Sun Jun 09, 2019 4:47 pm

AndyClaret wrote:The term was invented for the likes of him,...

Were you one of the ones who called me a terrorist sympathiser for expressing the apparently minority opinion on here that everyone should have the right to due process and a trial?

Explain to me how that is virtue-signalling, but those of you who wanted throw out the rulebook to punish someone none of us happened to like weren't signalling their virtue?

Quite often on here i'm accused of all sorts of **** when i express the opinion that, for example, we shouldn't start locking up thousands of Muslims who haven't committed a crime in response to one act of terrorism. Some of you were all for that. How is my position on that "virtue-signalling" but those who would come back with think-of-the-children argument weren't signalling how virtuous they were as defenders of defenceless children?

Virtue-signalling is "public, empty gestures", Damo is correct on that point, but i don't consider expressing my opinion and defending my humanist positions to be an empty gesture. It's actually what I believe. And when instead of debating someone on the merits of their arguments or their beliefs, and instead choose to dismiss them because you choose to believe that the person making the argument doesn't actually believe what they're saying, then you prove to the rest of us that you're not interested in having your own argument, or your own beliefs challenged.

There are absolutely virtue-signallers in the world. They aren't the ones posting anonymously on an internet forum where they are extremely unpopular. They're out in public bringing attention to themselves by expressing popularly held beliefs that they don't personally hold. ie. signalling their ******* virtue.

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Sun Jun 09, 2019 5:01 pm

It would appear the Rupa Huq would like the British government to say sorry for the creation of Israel.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... _share-top" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You do have to wonder where the priorities of some people in British politics actually lies?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Sun Jun 09, 2019 5:12 pm

Rowls wrote:It would appear the Rupa Huq would like the British government to say sorry for the creation of Israel.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... _share-top" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You do have to wonder where the priorities of some people in British politics actually lies?

This is why the Daily Mail aren't credible. Not quite as lacking in credibility as you, Rowls, but they're definitely down there in your vicinity.

They present an article with a headline that when you read the article you discover the headline was misleading or just a flat out lie.

For a start they alter a quote and put it in the headline. That's bad enough, but then in the article they even show that she didn't make that quote and actually doesn't want what they imply she wants in their headline.

nswering a question about whether an apology should be made, Ms Huq said: ‘1948, that happened under a British government. To my mind, an apology – yes. You could do one. A Labour Government could probably get that through.’

She added: ‘But it sounds a bit Tony Blair to me though, and we all know what happened to him.’

Why did you not present the exculpatory part of the article, Rowls? Did you not even bother to read it?

Rumbletonk · Post by **Rumbletonk** » Sun Jun 09, 2019 5:59 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Damo: A man desperately trying to not have to think.

If you draw comparisons it's "whataboutism". If you make an argument based on decency and humanity it's "virtue-signalling".
The embodiment of anti-intellectualism.

Ironically he uses both terms incorrectly, because, well... let's just say that understanding the meaning of things isn't important to the anti-intellectuals.

Do me a favour and read that back to yourself a couple of times. Regardless of the point you're trying to make or how passionate you are about it typing that is ridiculous

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Sun Jun 09, 2019 6:02 pm

Rumbletonk wrote:Do me a favour and read that back to yourself a couple of times. Regardless of the point you're trying to make or how passionate you are about it typing that is ridiculous

Can you be specific? What is it that's ridiculous?

The second paragraph is ridiculous, yes. Because i was channelling Damo's apparent opinions based on how he uses the two terms. That might not have been clear.

Rumbletonk · Post by **Rumbletonk** » Sun Jun 09, 2019 7:35 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Can you be specific? What is it that's ridiculous?

The second paragraph is ridiculous, yes. Because i was channelling Damo's apparent opinions based on how he uses the two terms. That might not have been clear.

Any point you make is secondary to how you make it but you know that. I don't understand what you get from it.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Sun Jun 09, 2019 7:36 pm

Rumbletonk wrote:Any point you make is secondary to how you make it but you know that.

Only to idiots.

Erasmus · Post by **Erasmus** » Sun Jun 09, 2019 8:19 pm

Android, I can't really respond to your critique of my views because all you say is that it is 'not that simple.' You need to explain why it is more complex; as far as I can see anti-Zionism is not anti-semitism. Of course, the two may overlap in the views of some individuals, but to therefore conclude that they are in any way identical is fallacy.

And to Imploding Turtle, I usually agree with your ideas, but I think you are quite wrong when say the mode of expression does not affect the ideas themselves, unless one is an idiot. There are a couple of quotes from Gandhi that come to mind: 'Never think for one moment that the end is not shaped by the means.' If you employ abuse as a part of your argument, it soils the conclusion you are arguing for. I have never thought that Gandhi was an idiot.

And: "Become yourself the change you would like to see in the world." I think we would both like to see a world in which no race, community or section of society is abused (in the widest sense of the word) and so it is better if we avoid abuse on our own part. Just my opinion and probably you think differently.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Sun Jun 09, 2019 8:38 pm

Erasmus wrote:Android, I can't really respond to your critique of my views because all you say is that it is 'not that simple.' You need to explain why it is more complex; as far as I can see anti-Zionism is not anti-semitism. Of course, the two may overlap in the views of some individuals, but to therefore conclude that they are in any way identical is fallacy.

And to Imploding Turtle, I usually agree with your ideas, but I think you are quite wrong when say the mode of expression does not affect the ideas themselves, unless one is an idiot. There are a couple of quotes from Gandhi that come to mind: 'Never think for one moment that the end is not shaped by the means.' If you employ abuse as a part of your argument, it soils the conclusion you are arguing for. I have never thought that Gandhi was an idiot.

And: "Become yourself the change you would like to see in the world." I think we would both like to see a world in which no race, community or section of society is abused (in the widest sense of the word) and so it is better if we avoid abuse on our own part. Just my opinion and probably you think differently.

At the risk of being accused of virtue-signalling by Damo, I think it's fair to say that pretty much all antisemites and anti-Zionists but not all anti-Zionists are antisemites

And I don't employ abuse as a part of my arguments.

Rumbletonk · Post by **Rumbletonk** » Sun Jun 09, 2019 8:59 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Only to idiots.

I hope you have more than being an online clever dick

Greenmile · Post by **Greenmile** » Sun Jun 09, 2019 9:31 pm

android wrote:I wish you would make your mind up as to whether you have, or have not, looked into the antisemitism evidence about Corbyn and his party. Sounds like you have reached a conclusion again - it is nothing more than "criticising the state of Israel" - or was that just another joke?

All I’m saying is that there are a lot more grey areas and nuance when it comes to alleged antisemitism than when it comes to chanting racist songs at the football.

Eg - some folk will say criticising the state of Israel is antisemitic, some will disagree. Some folk say that pointing out that the Jewish population has a louder voice in our political and media scene than you would expect given their numbers is antisemitic, others would disagree and point to historical reasons why this is the case - it’s a grey area.

Only racists (and Rowls, it seems) think chanting racist songs at a black footballer, or comparing a young man of African descent to a gorilla (to pick out a couple of examples) isn’t racist - much less of a grey area.

To draw a fairly poor analogy, some of the examples of antisemitism levied at Corbyn are the equivalent of disagreeing with the implementation of the Rooney rule (grey area / nuanced topic, with reasonable views on both sides). However, some of the examples of racism that Rowls has defended / played down in the past on here (eg racist chanting at the football) are the equivalent of chanting “Jews will not replace us” or spraypainting swastikas on a synagogue (a little less nuanced).

If you have proof of Corbyn chanting “Jews will not replace us” or spraypainting swastikas on a synagogue, I’ll be happy to take a firmer side in this debate. For now, all I’m really saying is that Rowls is a hypocrite (and a liar when he says stuff like “I speak out against racism whenever I can and wherever I see it”)

Corky · Post by **Corky** » Mon Jun 10, 2019 9:09 am

Greenmile wrote:All I’m saying is that there are a lot more grey areas and nuance when it comes to alleged antisemitism than when it comes to chanting racist songs at the football.

Eg - some folk will say criticising the state of Israel is antisemitic, some will disagree. Some folk say that pointing out that the Jewish population has a louder voice in our political and media scene than you would expect given their numbers is antisemitic, others would disagree and point to historical reasons why this is the case - it’s a grey area.

Only racists (and Rowls, it seems) think chanting racist songs at a black footballer, or comparing a young man of African descent to a gorilla (to pick out a couple of examples) isn’t racist - much less of a grey area.

To draw a fairly poor analogy, some of the examples of antisemitism levied at Corbyn are the equivalent of disagreeing with the implementation of the Rooney rule (grey area / nuanced topic, with reasonable views on both sides). However, some of the examples of racism that Rowls has defended / played down in the past on here (eg racist chanting at the football) are the equivalent of chanting “Jews will not replace us” or spraypainting swastikas on a synagogue (a little less nuanced).

If you have proof of Corbyn chanting “Jews will not replace us” or spraypainting swastikas on a synagogue, I’ll be happy to take a firmer side in this debate. For now, all I’m really saying is that Rowls is a hypocrite (and a liar when he says stuff like “I speak out against racism whenever I can and wherever I see it”)

Aside from the Rowls stuff - which I can't comment on as I haven't read all the comments in the thread - the above is an excellent critique.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jun 10, 2019 9:15 am

Though I generally believe that Labour has an anti-semite problem, I'd also say that I'm glad I'm not the one trying to work out if stuff is anti-semitic or not.

But constant criticism of Israel is fine (lets face, even those of us who are broadly supportive think Nethanayu is abysmal and his tactics abhorrent) but its very easy to slip up when constantly ranting about it.

Saying that, someone like Owen Jones isn't remotely anti-semitic so its not that hard to avoid!

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Mon Jun 10, 2019 9:26 am

Rowls wrote:I speak out against racism whenever I can and wherever I see it. See the thread about the Rooney rule adopted by the EFL.

I've read those comments and I'm still trying to work out where you are speaking out against racism.

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Mon Jun 10, 2019 3:13 pm

Spijed wrote:I've read those comments and I'm still trying to work out where you are speaking out against racism.

Are you serious?

The EFL are insisting that clubs have an applicant who is chosen solely by the colour of their skin colour.

What do you call it when people judge others not by the content of their character but instead solely by the colour of their skin?

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Mon Jun 10, 2019 3:15 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Saying that, someone like Owen Jones isn't remotely anti-semitic so its not that hard to avoid!

And yet, and yet....

A quick google brings up this twitter account:

https://twitter.com/nudderingnudnik/sta ... 88?lang=en" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

android · Post by **android** » Tue Jun 11, 2019 10:56 am

We are back where we started Greenmile. Antisemitism in Corbyn's Labour party may be grey and nuanced in places but it is obvious in other places (the places you don't want to look).

Much more important to be outraged by a few stupid football fans singing about the alleged size of Lukaku's appendage than it is to concern yourself with trivial stuff like our future Prime Minister describing British Jews as not like us. But you don't need to worry about Corbyn passing your ludicrously low test of spraying swastikas on synagogues. Way to go.