Gordaleman wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 21, 2020 10:59 am

Criticising the Israeli government for it's stance on Palestine, is NOT anti semitic. Corbyn has NEVER criticised the Israeli people, only their government.

That's fine but why quote my post? I was only talking about Corbyn's anti-Semitic remarks about British Jews. He did not mention Palestine or Palestinians or the Israeli government or any Israelis.

AndrewJB wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 21, 2020 11:35 am

I thought he was referring to specific people with that comment, rather than British Jews. But is that what you’re pinning your charge on, and in the face of a lifetime fighting racism? I could take your point of there was a history of bigotry, like writing articles that are racist as our PM has done, but there isn’t. And he’s done loads of work for his local Jewish community. It doesn’t add up as anti-semitism.

What charge? I haven't called Corbyn racist if that's what you think. I was only pointing out that you were wrong to claim that he had never made anti-Semitic remarks. I like to think that I'm open-minded and tolerant enough to think that someone can make a mistake without being branded racist for life - I don't self-define as either left wing or "liberal" after all!

Of course, I can understand why others, particularly Jewish people, believe he is anti-Semitic when taken alongside his history of varying degrees of tolerating, supporting or honouring some anti-Semites but that's not what I was saying and it has been debated to death and no-one is likely to change their minds. But he has, on one occasion to my knowledge, made clear anti-Semitic remarks so people can make of that what they will.

android wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 21, 2020 9:15 am

Where you saw only smears, most of us saw some disturbing facts, but it's too late to re-run all that. But I was just picking you up on the specific point that you wrongly claimed that Corbyn had never made an anti-Semitic remark in his life. Your disinterest in those remarks can't make them disappear!

Pot calling kettle.

Do you remember the accusations of islamophobia in the Tory Party? Well, probably, unless you’re a Tory with a short memory and a propensity for lying aka Boris Johnson.

Prior to the election and during a live TV debate BJ promised an independent inquiry into allegations of islamophobia in the Tory Party. Those familiar with BJ’s way of doing things will not be surprised to learn that the inquiry like, BJ’s promise, has been quietly kicked into the long grass.

Strangely, a lot of the press has remained silent on the issue of our PM breaking his promises to investigate racism in the Conservative Party.

Who's the pot and who's the kettle!

As I have explained, my point was not to label Corbyn a racist. On the contrary, it was to point out that even Saint Jeremy has, shall we say, "misspoken" in the past. His was actually a more racist comment than Johnson's supposed racist article about Blair's visit to Africa all those years ago, using a few descriptive words that are now frowned upon and I believe he apologised for using words now deemed offensive. But let's not split hairs - I think we would all be better off if we spent less time trawling the past for spurious reasons to accuse others of racism.

Boris seems to me to be rubbish at being a racist PM. For example, he appointed the UK's first Asian heritage Chancellor and then got rid of him and replaced him with the UK's second Asian heritage Chancellor. Probably our first non-white Home Secretary as well I guess. It's almost like their race does not matter a jot! Something to celebrate - yes?

android wrote: ↑

Mon Feb 24, 2020 10:39 am

What charge? I haven't called Corbyn racist if that's what you think. I was only pointing out that you were wrong to claim that he had never made anti-Semitic remarks. I like to think that I'm open-minded and tolerant enough to think that someone can make a mistake without being branded racist for life - I don't self-define as either left wing or "liberal" after all!

Of course, I can understand why others, particularly Jewish people, believe he is anti-Semitic when taken alongside his history of varying degrees of tolerating, supporting or honouring some anti-Semites but that's not what I was saying and it has been debated to death and no-one is likely to change their minds. But he has, on one occasion to my knowledge, made clear anti-Semitic remarks so people can make of that what they will.

He didn't say anything anti-Semitic. He criticized a small group of (probably) British Zionists, who had berated the Palestinian Ambassador after he made a speech (that had been full of irony, and the history of his people, which those Zionists hadn't shown an understanding of by their reaction to him). It's not anti-Semitic to criticize someone who is a Zionist, and in fact some Jewish people do. Johnson in comparison is far worse, and I can't believe you'd have the brass neck to defend the articles he's written. The letterboxes and bankrobbers comments were pure dog whistle racism in the worst Tory tradition. He purposely picked on a group of people that have done nothing to deserve his insults, a very small and vulnerable demographic, and he would have known that his article would stoke racism (a 375% rise in Islamophobic attacks in the week after his article was published), but he published it anyway. I think it's positive that we have a more diverse cabinet, but look at the policies the government runs with - deporting people who have lived here nearly their whole lives, and depriving people of their citizenship, is all the same school of thought that gave us the Windrush Scandal.

I wish I had your brass neck Andrew!

Try, if you will (I don't think you will) substituting Corbyn with Johnson and British Zionists (as you call them) for let's say British Rastafarians. Go on. I dare you to give it a go. Here is what he said: "they clearly have two problems. One is they don't want to study history, and secondly, having lived in this country for a very long time, probably all their lives, they don't understand English irony either...So I think they needed two lessons, which perhaps we can help them with."

Nice eh? Those Rastafarians born and bred in Britain - "they" are just not like "us" are "they". We need to teach them a couple of lessons.

android wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 25, 2020 9:43 am

I wish I had your brass neck Andrew!

Try, if you will (I don't think you will) substituting Corbyn with Johnson and British Zionists (as you call them) for let's say British Rastafarians. Go on. I dare you to give it a go. Here is what he said: "they clearly have two problems. One is they don't want to study history, and secondly, having lived in this country for a very long time, probably all their lives, they don't understand English irony either...So I think they needed two lessons, which perhaps we can help them with."

Nice eh? Those Rastafarians born and bred in Britain - "they" are just not like "us" are "they". We need to teach them a couple of lessons.

Context is everything. Corbyn was describing how the Palestinian ambassador gave a speech that was loaded with history and irony. In the audience were a group of Zionists, who later approached and berated the ambassador, showing (in Corbyn's opinion) that they had not understood the history and irony within the ambassador's speech. That's it, and I'm sorry but I cannot see how you can draw this out to be anti-Semitic.

I am sure that's true. When it comes to Corbyn there seems to be a lot you cannot see.

Let's agree to disagree. UTC

Well this seems a bit surprising. Patel having quite the impact there

BBC News - Home Office boss quits over 'campaign against him'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51687287

Some of the comments on twitter supporting perma smirk Patel on ‘clearing out these unelected officials’ are hilarious and frightening both at the same time!

She triggers all the usual suspects.

claretandy wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 29, 2020 1:39 pm

She triggers all the usual suspects.

She certainly sniggers (cheesy grin) at any misfortune that people have, as can been seen whenever she gets interviewed on TV.

Petty prattle is joining the Trump brigade. Break all the rules and then just hum loudly.

She should be reported to the standards folk and suspended.

Wr are in the hands of extremists.

I met Patel in the summer, a very tiny lady, but a character. She was all smiles when we saw her, cracking a few jokes.

The bloke who resigned, like virtually all department heads, is a career civil servant (most of these posts are filled without external competition). The minister or PM (deputised to the Cabinet Office Minister, currently Gove) can veto any permanent secretary appointments I believe, but they are tough to budge when in post.

Ultimately, permenant secretaries are there to emsure their department hits objectives, partly budgetary, and partly performance. Anybody reckon the Home Office has done that under his leadership? I can’t see any way his staying would have been good for the UK.

So this resignation will suit Cummmings to a tee. He can use the tribunal to advertise the “civil servant vs the people” agenda. He won’t care what it costs the government if the tribunal says he has to be compensated. Gove and Patel can now hand pick a replacement, who could be there for a decade.

The methods may stink, but I sense they are right to do it.

CrosspoolClarets wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 29, 2020 9:39 pm

I met Patel in the summer, a very tiny lady, but a character. She was all smiles when we saw her, cracking a few jokes.

The bloke who resigned, like virtually all department heads, is a career civil servant (most of these posts are filled without external competition). The minister or PM (deputised to the Cabinet Office Minister, currently Gove) can veto any permanent secretary appointments I believe, but they are tough to budge when in post.

Ultimately, permenant secretaries are there to emsure their department hits objectives, partly budgetary, and partly performance. Anybody reckon the Home Office has done that under his leadership? I can’t see any way his staying would have been good for the UK.

So this resignation will suit Cummmings to a tee. He can use the tribunal to advertise the “civil servant vs the people” agenda. He won’t care what it costs the government if the tribunal says he has to be compensated. Gove and Patel can now hand pick a replacement, who could be there for a decade.

The methods may stink, but I sense they are right to do it.

She sounds lovely. What was her best joke?

IanMcL wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 29, 2020 8:43 pm

Petty prattle is joining the Trump brigade. Break all the rules and then just hum loudly.She should be reported to the standards folk and suspended.
We are in the hands of extremists.

No we're not, Labour lost the election !

Steve-Harpers-perm wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 29, 2020 10:02 pm

She sounds lovely. What was her best joke?

None of them were particularly good in truth

I seem to recall a joke about her name and a pun concerning “pretty”. Fairly poor stuff and luckily not on the Home Secretary person spec.