http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43536830" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Corbyn appears to be making all the right noises in regards to the current Antisemitism crisis engulfing Labour, but what will he have to do to ensure the survival of the party?

Sidney1st wrote:what will he have to do to ensure the survival of the party?

Have I missed something?

Click on the link.

Some Antisemitism accusations leveled at the Labour party, inc Corbyn, and there have been protests etc.

I'm sure the Labour Party will survive, individuals perhaps not but the party will continue.

Simple- Labour start to actually act against the anti-Semites within the party or else everyone will see that Corbyn is merely talking the talk and not backing it up. They can begin by actually expelling Ken Livingstone from the party rather than merely extending his suspension....nothing less than a complete “purge” will do. Right now Labour not just has to clean itself up but it has to be seen to clean itself up; and the second bit is probably more important than the first!

If that doesn’t happen then it will be up to the MPs to stand up and make their views known publicly- by resigning the whip and sitting as independant MPs for the remainder of this parliament or until Corbyn is forced to resign as leader. Good luck to whichever poor bastards then get selected by the constituency Labour parties and are assigned guilt by association- it won’t do career prospects in the “real” world any good at all.

If used properly (i.e. negative campaigning) then this could be used to destroy Labour’s vote; after all- who wants to be thought of, or known for, supporting a party which condones and allows anti-Semitism. Let’s be honest; the historical precedent isn’t the best in that area...

I’ve seen on TV, listened to the radio and read on news pages all about what Corbyn is supposedly done (I.e. all the antisemitism) but I have only seen, heard and read people criticising Corbyn for things he hasn’t said or done - or completely misinterpreting what he has actually said or done.

I must say that he must have really upset someone in the BBC because they kept on and on about it on Radio 5 all morning making him out to be someone who is against all Jews, or that’s how it seemed to me (do I have to be careful here in case I also upset someone for stating an opinion about what I think someone has said about Jewish people?)

Quite frankly I am fed up with it all - using that specific part of history to attempt to misrepresent someone in the public domain for political gain. Again - do I have to be careful that I don’t get labelled a holocaust denier just because I am fed up with it?

It’s a tricky one for sure

Mass Media control at its finest.


Dont ever seek prominent public office in today's western world if you are ever in a position to be troublesome to the faceless ones.



Lol
And God forbid if you've a vaguely political social conscience while your there!

I think this is yet another part of a coordinated attack on Corbyn. The Tories are clearly rattled by the prospect of a less than successful Brexit and need to get their retaliation in early as it were.
The political landscape regarding Jews is quite interesting.
About 1 in 220 of our population is Jewish yet our House of Lords, for example, features 65 Jews out of 800 lords, a 1 in 13 proportion.
Looking also at banking and the judiciary, there does seem to be a massive over-representation.
Whether it matters or not I'll leave for others to decide but there's no denying a lot of crucial power and influence lies disproportionately in Jewish hands.

Alargeclaret, that photo and comment made me laugh out loud and I'm sat alone watching tv.

evensteadiereddie wrote:I think this is yet another part of a coordinated attack on Corbyn. The Tories are clearly rattled by the prospect of a less than successful Brexit and need to get their retaliation in early as it were.
The political landscape regarding Jews is quite interesting.
About 1 in 220 of our population is Jewish yet our House of Lords, for example, features 65 Jews out of 800 lords, a 1 in 13 proportion.
Looking also at banking and the judiciary, there does seem to be a massive over-representation.
Whether it matters or not I'll leave for others to decide but there's no denying a lot of crucial power and influence lies disproportionately in Jewish hands.

I know you don't mean it like that, but it does look like 1930's Nazi propoganda.

evensteadiereddie wrote:I think this is yet another part of a coordinated attack on Corbyn. The Tories are clearly rattled by the prospect of a less than successful Brexit and need to get their retaliation in early as it were.
The political landscape regarding Jews is quite interesting.
About 1 in 220 of our population is Jewish yet our House of Lords, for example, features 65 Jews out of 800 lords, a 1 in 13 proportion.
Looking also at banking and the judiciary, there does seem to be a massive over-representation.
Whether it matters or not I'll leave for others to decide but there's no denying a lot of crucial power and influence lies disproportionately in Jewish hands.

Christ, I thought this anti Semitic leftie thing was there but maybe overblown. Not sure now.

I'll tell you all this now.

I don't have any power or money what so ever.

As I said, I'll let others debate whether these figures mean anything but you can begin to understand why the left might resent this disproportion and why the right might rather like to preserve the status quo and hang on to it.

Eddie, if that is a view held by you (not saying it is btw) then Labour have an issue with anti-semitism.

Corbyn almost certainly isn't, but he's happy to spend a lot of time with people who clearly are, and completely unrepentant about it.

evensteadiereddie wrote:As I said, I'll let others debate whether these figures mean anything but you can begin to understand why the left might resent this disproportion and why the right might rather like to preserve the status quo and hang on to it.

The right might want to preserve the status quo for two reasons - one, because that's what conservatism is in broad outline about; two, because taking money off a specific group or race of people because they think they have more than their share is utterly NOT what conservatism is about.

I'm not sure that's strictly true, Lancaster. It may be some pockets of the Labour part resent what they perceive to be a skewed system where one particular group appears to be over-represented.
Other Labour - and non-Labour - followers have pointed out that men, for example, are grossly over-represented in most walks of life yet they aren't labelled "Anti-men" and expected to perform a public apology for the media.
Either way, those who hold power and influence will most certainly want to keep it all costs hence the phoney political storm that seems to be being created.

I think you are trivialising this eddie.

You don't get protesters in those sorts of numbers outside Parliament because its all a phoney political storm. They are genuinely worried about the rise of anti-semitism in the Labour Party (and nationwide as well)

How many British MPs are working for Israel?

Jonathon Cook .. ( is a Nazareth- based journalist and winner of the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism)

"Al Jazeera are to be congratulated on an undercover investigation exposing something most of us could probably have guessed: that some Israeli embassy staff in the UK – let’s not pussy around, Mossad agents – are working with senior political activists and politicians in the Conservative and Labour parties to subvert their own parties from within, and skew British foreign policy so that it benefits Israeli, rather than British, interests....

.. one can and should expose and shame the British politicians who are collaborating with Israel in further harming Britain’s representative democracy..

.. They are members of the Conservative and Labour Friends of Israel. They dominate both parliamentary parties, but especially the Conservatives. According to the CFI’s figures, fully 80 per cent of Tory MPs belong to the party’s Friends of Israel group.

..Once, no one would have hesitated to call British politicians acting in the interests of a foreign power, and very possibly taking financial benefits for doing so, “traitors”..

https://www.jonathan-cook.net/blog/2017 ... or-israel/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Gosh!

Considering that anti-semitism led to the greatest atrocity the world has ever seen (though a few hard left dictators like Stalin and Mao may challenge that award) I struggle to understand why anybody can suggest it shouldn’t be rooted out wherever it is found.

The left’s stance on this (a minority of the left it has to be said) is the most abhorrent of a lot of distasteful stuff UK people of all varying political views come out with. It has been bubbling under the surface for years, just about visible. When Corbyn took charge, it was always going to burst to the surface.

Anti-semitism, Brexit, socialism - there are a lot of massive polarising issues that the current Labour electorate may decide they cannot vote for. It only takes one to break the party, but there are three. The party will split within 5 years I will predict.

AlargeClaret wrote:It’s a tricky one for sure

After recent events you'd have thought Jeremy would have known better, even if he was just doing it for a joke.

This a genuine question. Is there evidence of anti semitism in Labour? As opposed to opposition to some aspects of the Israeli State’s policy.

Not a bad day for Theresa May either.

I' not sure what the specific situations might be and who said what about whom.
I'm pretty certain that Corbyn isn't anit-semetic but as RMutt said in an earlier post
'opposition to some aspects of the Israeli State’s policy.'

And probably sympathetic to the Palestinians and their plight.
And in many cases quite rightly so.

That doesn't make Corbyn or the Labour Party anti-semetic.

It clearly does in some eyes and the Israel State is extremely sensitive to any criticism
and it's another easy story for most of the press who are still trying to make any mud stick.

It really isn't that important an issue in the grand scheme of things as they are now.

They've tried in the past and as far as I can recall not much if anything came
of previous attempts to slur Corbyn and/or the Labour Party.

If anything previous ones have actually resulted in the Labour Party doing quite well
especially at the last General Election which suggests that previous attempts to slur
Corbyn have actually had the reverse affect.

Wonder what they will come up with next?

.

RMutt wrote:This a genuine question. Is there evidence of anti semitism in Labour? As opposed to opposition to some aspects of the Israeli State’s policy.

The answer is “yes” - a simple Google will find plenty, but the party have rightly dispensed with those individuals. They have to of course, it would harm them not to.

Then it gets into more subtle issues about mindset and open support of domestic and overseas anti-semites.

The focus has to be on Corbyn and his own long standing beliefs. The likes of Livingstone are never going to run Labour so it is Corbyn who we have to decide is fit to be our PM. I actually think he has good solutions to several current problems in the UK (e.g. left behind people) but this (amongst other things) disqualifies him in my mind. Has he ever properly answered these questions (rather than evaded) on the front page of the Jewish Chronicle from when he was appointed Leader?

https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/the- ... er-1.68097

Just another smear campaign against him based on not very much. I suggest he won't be flapped by it. In fact, it's possibly opening more people's eyes to the media's constant bashing of him.

Look at the example of Trump in the US - the negative media campaign against him only seemed to make him stronger. It certainly made his claims that they were out to get him seem more credible.

.

Oblivion, I hope.

He'll be the next Prime Minister

Probably, as long as he doesn't have to make a foreign policy decision ever again.

And regarding the Jewish issue, Corbyn has admitted there are problems (as shown by this thread)

https://twitter.com/Mendelpol/status/978009855477809153" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If he says there is and as everyone who likes Corbyn parrots what he says with zealot like frequency, why are you not agreeing with him?

Lancasterclaret wrote:Probably, as long as he doesn't have to make a foreign policy decision ever again.

And regarding the Jewish issue, Corbyn has admitted there are problems (as shown by this thread)

https://twitter.com/Mendelpol/status/978009855477809153" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If he says there is and as everyone who likes Corbyn parrots what he says with zealot like frequency, why are you not agreeing with him?

I like Corbyn. Labour earned my vote with him as leader, but this wouldn't lead me to defend the indefensible, or suggest he's perfect. Corbyn's populism is a positive one - if we all work together we can make Britain a better place for everyone; as compared to that of Trump or Britain First - who whip up negative emotions by setting out all the dark and usually foreign threats facing the nation. People getting elated about renationalising railways and utilities is a far cry from people getting emotional about building a wall or banning burkas. Corbyn is also a lot more honest than populists such as Farage or Trump. That's where my support comes from, and I would guess the same for others.

The foreign policy question is a strange one. Hindsight shows that Corbyn was right on all the major foreign policy questions of the last twenty years. Take this from a speech before the invasion of Iraq:

"For those who say that this is a necessary and just conflict because it will bring about peace and security: September the 11th was a dreadful event. 8000 deaths in Afghanistan brought back none of those who died in the World Trade Centre. Thousands more deaths in Iraq will not make things right. It will set off a spiral of conflict, of hate, of misery, of desperation, that will fuel the wars, the conflict, the terrorism, the depression, and the misery of future generations." - A Corbyn foreign policy would be a welcome change in my view.

What next for Labour? Crack on and win power.

https://youtu.be/J5E1BVzPUUY" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No one clicks blind links.

Harriet Harmann telling a distasteful joke about Jews, BUT it's been cut to suit the whatever agenda the youtuber has and doesn't give any context as to why she's saying it, just portrays her in a bad light.

morpheus2 wrote:



After recent events you'd have thought Jeremy would have known better, even if he was just doing it for a joke.

Sidney1st wrote:Harriet Harmann telling a distasteful joke about Jews, BUT it's been cut to suit the whatever agenda the youtuber has and doesn't give any context as to why she's saying it, just portrays her in a bad light.

Both of these examples are snapshots to put someone in a bad light, and it is what some aspects of the media always try and do to suit their agenda (or the agenda of their paymasters...)

Sidney1st wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43536830

Corbyn appears to be making all the right noises in regards to the current Antisemitism crisis engulfing Labour, but what will he have to do to ensure the survival of the party?

resign

AndrewJB is looking forward to Corbyn foreign policy. I can see why.

What I would ask though is whether his policies will stop people hating the West as much, whether those countries will become less dangerous (e.g. ceasing nuclear development), whether countries will feel less emboldened or incentivised to confront Israel, whether they would damage our friendship with the US, whether they lead to Russia having less pervasive power and whether we can maintain our balance of power in the Middle East and Eastern Europe compared to Russia.

I feel the answer is no to all of the above.

That it would risk elevating Russia to a new level of influence, ditto Russia’s allies in Iran, Yemen and Syria, and would make the world including Britain a far, far more dangerous place. Yes it would be nice for the world to be more peaceful, but Earth is the real world, not the one Jeremy inhabits.

I can see why many feel we are throwing the dice needlessly with Brexit, but by heck we would be throwing them more by voting JC in.

The Labour Party will be fine.

I don’t buy into this media peddled rubbish in the slightest.

Does anyone actually believe that he’s anti Semitic?

Anti Zionist maybe. That’s totally different.

Colburn_Claret wrote:resign

But would a new leader be able to control the 3 per cent (300,000 new members) of the Labour vote which are Corbyn fans? They are noisy, committed and, as Steve Smith would put it 'willing to push the line'.

But then I guess the moderate wing of Labour hopes most of them are first time voters who will soon get back to being more interested in beer and sex.

Corbyn isn't anti-semitic

What he is though is someone who never thought he'd have to explain himself to get elected as PM, so he's got a lot of things that you are going to struggle to explain away when you are trying to win an election against an overwhelming pro-Tory media.

And of course, one of his closest friends in Labour is clearly one.

He probably didn't expect to need to explain a very short comment on a Facebook picture years after the event.

It's almost as though the Government wanted something to take the front pages over their withdrawal of free school meals for the most needy or something

Re-naming the party 'The subjugation Party' might be a good idea. The mock Egyptian King Corbyn wants to destroy the middle classes to create a Pol Pot Kmer kmer Rouge can-can world for the red and yellow army.

He's appearing at a big outdoor music festival this summer. I suggest they get Pink Floyd to headline it along the lines of:

'We don't need no education'
Nat it dat tong, yr nah...'

UpTheBeehole wrote: It's almost as though the Government wanted something to take the front pages over their withdrawal of free school meals for the most needy or something

They've just raised the threshold for eligibility haven't they for new claimants of Universal credits or people earning under a certain amount?

People currently on Universal credit don't need to worry about it, nor do people who're currently under the earnings limit even if a pay rise pushes them over after April 1st.

Hardly the withdrawal from those most needy.

Then of course there's the Obamas visiting the inner London schools with the message that: 'If you go to comprehensive school and watch Sesame St., you too can count 10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1,0, and be the commander of a nuclear submarine one day.

Since I became interested in politics about 8 years ago people have always theorised about the break up of the Labour Party, even more so since Corbyn was elected leader. It's a broad church and internal conflict has been a theme throughout Labour's existence. Even when there actually was a rival party started, in it's current form it only has 12 seats .. Labour has been through much greater threats to it's existence than what's currently in the news. In fact, I'd wager the people predicting it's break up are just wishful thinkers who are terrified of Labour winning power.

The Tory party is currently experiencing a much bigger split than the Labour party

I don't think that's relevant UTB. You have started the thread on the Labour party.

Pstotto wrote:I don't think that's relevant UTB. You have started the thread on the Labour party.

Is Sidney1st one of my 'many' usernames too?

All parties have to a lesser or greater extent because of Brexit.