Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?

[moof]

12 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

Maybe if Williamson was an actual anti-semite it could be. I don't believe that though, think it's just part of the usual bullshit and there's quite a few Jews who think the same thing. We just don't usually see their views in the media because it's the other side of the argument.

And if they do speak up they’re accused of racism by frauds like Rico and have right wing MPs calling for their expulsion 

[Rico1304]

Any of you following Rachel Riley on Twitter?  There’s so much AS slung her way, it’s funny reading this thread, and then looking at the Labour FB and Twitter accounts openly posting vile racist abuse.  Councillors, party members, every day.  

[Numero Veinticinco]

3 hours ago, viRdjil said:

Is she going to be automatically expelled now?

What has she actually done? I saw a tweet, but who was she referring to? The Jews who posed for a picture (if there were any) or the woman trying to stage pictures with people ‘of the Jewish race’? 

[Strontium]

3 hours ago, Rico1304 said:

Is it not ‘some of my best friends are black’? 

 

Imagine if a Tory MP had been accused of racism against black people, and his reps were scouting round for black people to get a photo taken with him, to prove he wasn't racist. Nobody here would have any compunction about describing that as crass in the extreme.

[Numero Veinticinco]

Just now, Sixtimes Dog said:

 

Imagine if a Tory MP had been accused of racism against black people, and his reps were scouting round for black people to get a photo taken with him, to prove he wasn't racist. Nobody here would have any compunction about describing that as crass in the extreme.

No of course not. Whomever that was trying to stage that photo is, at best, a badly misguided person trying to stage a photo-op. Isn’t that what Duffield was having a pop at? 

 

Ive only briefly looked at Rico’s post that contains the video, but am I wildly off the mark on that?

[Strontium]

No, I think you have the gist of it. Don't really understand the bizarre attacks on Duffield here.

[Numero Veinticinco]

5 minutes ago, Sixtimes Dog said:

No, I think you have the gist of it. Don't really understand the bizarre attacks on Duffield here.

I’m guessing that the likes of Ardja think she was saying any of the Jews who had their photo taken with him should be banned? Seems weird this. 

 

I don't know if I think Williamson did too much wrong in the first place, but even if he did nothing at all, staging a lot hoot in that way is, to be generous, a cynical attempt to use the race of others to undermine those criticising him. 

[Jairzinho]

17 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

I don't know if I think Williamson did too much wrong in the first place, but even if he did nothing at all, staging a lot hoot in that way is, to be generous, a cynical attempt to use the race of others to undermine those criticising him. 

Pandora's box of ridiculous cuntery isn't for closing.

[aRdja]

31 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

I’m guessing that the likes of Ardja think she was saying any of the Jews who had their photo taken with him should be banned? Seems weird this. 

 

I don't know if I think Williamson did too much wrong in the first place, but even if he did nothing at all, staging a lot hoot in that way is, to be generous, a cynical attempt to use the race of others to undermine those criticising him. 

Yep, asking for Jewish members to be expelled from the party isn’t a good idea IMO. Especially not at the moment. The last thing Labour need is another anti-semitism saga.

[Numero Veinticinco]

4 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

Yep, asking for Jewish members to be expelled from the party isn’t a good idea IMO. Especially not at the moment. The last thing Labour need is another anti-semitism saga.

Jewish members should be expelled if they've done something to be expelled. Jews should be treated no different from anybody else. Just as they shouldn't be expelled because they're Jews, they shouldn't be protected because they're Jews. That said, I don't think she was having a go at Jewish people but those setting the photo op? 

[aRdja]

1 hour ago, Rico1304 said:

Any of you following Rachel Riley on Twitter?  There’s so much AS slung her way, it’s funny reading this thread, and then looking at the Labour FB and Twitter accounts openly posting vile racist abuse.  Councillors, party members, every day.  

I used to, but I had to unfollow during that episode with the 15 year old girl. Was very difficult to witness. 

[aRdja]

4 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Jewish members should be expelled if they've done something to be expelled. Jews should be treated no different from anybody else. Just as they shouldn't be expelled because they're Jews, they shouldn't be protected because they're Jews. That said, I don't think she was having a go at Jewish people but those setting the photo op? 

The person setting the photo op is also Jewish herself from what I’ve read. I get what you’re saying, but I’d rather they stay of the safe side and steer clear of any action that could be (mis)construed as anti-semitic.

[moof]

6 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Jewish members should be expelled if they've done something to be expelled. Jews should be treated no different from anybody else. Just as they shouldn't be expelled because they're Jews, they shouldn't be protected because they're Jews. That said, I don't think she was having a go at Jewish people but those setting the photo op? 

The people “setting the photo op” were Jewish people who support Williamson. Is it in the best taste? I’d say probably fuckin not like, but should they face threats of violence and intimidation or be kicked out of the party because they support a guy who’s falsely smeared as an antisemite? Of course not. It’s a witch hunt. 

[Rico1304]

17 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

I used to, but I had to unfollow during that episode with the 15 year old girl. Was very difficult to witness. 

That wasn’t her. 

[Sugar Ape]

27 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

I used to, but I had to unfollow during that episode with the 15 year old girl. Was very difficult to witness. 

Different Jewish woman you’re thinking about. 

 

28 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Jewish members should be expelled if they've done something to be expelled. Jews should be treated no different from anybody else. Just as they shouldn't be expelled because they're Jews, they shouldn't be protected because they're Jews. That said, I don't think she was having a go at Jewish people but those setting the photo op? 

 

This is Williamson thanking the person who filmed that clip, Melanie Melvin. 

 

 

This is Melanie Melvin. 

 

https://antisemitism.uk/melanie-melvin-leaves-labour-after-claiming-sarin-gassing-was-filmed-by-the-bbc-at-pinewood-on-the-orders-of-mrs-may-and-the-israeli-lobby/

 

 

[Rico1304]

15 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

That wasn’t her. 

And what was reported didn’t happen either 

 

in fact she’s got a bit legal on those rumours. Reverend and the Makers will tell you. 

[aRdja]

I’d rather all labour MPs keep their noses out of it altogether. Not worth the risk IMO.

[aRdja]

24 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

And what was reported didn’t happen either 

 

in fact she’s got a bit legal on those rumours. Reverend and the Makers will tell you. 

Nah was both Tracey Ann “Liverpudlians are all twats” Obermann and her.

[Rico1304]

1 minute ago, viRdjil said:

Nah was both Tracey Ann “Liverpudlians are all twats” Obermann and her.

Ok

 

Then I wonder why there were lots of mea culpa apologies?  Back pedal. 

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

Rachel Riley is a cunt. 

 

She's also invented a new form of (what she classes as) "antisemitism" which she refers to as "jew baiting." 

 

This "jew baiting" seems to consist of saying things that offends/upsets/disagrees with a certain section of the Jewish population, mainly made up by the likes of Collier, Hodge, Oberman and Riley et al, but which doesn't offend thousands of other Jewish people. 

 

It's dangerous territory when such patently mentally deranged people appear to be setting the narrative on what amounts to "antisemitism" and distorting the concept in such a subjective manner. 

[Rico1304]

4 minutes ago, Nelly-Torres said:

Rachel Riley is a cunt. 

 

She's also invented a new form of (what she classes as) "antisemitism" which she refers to as "jew baiting." 

 

This "jew baiting" seems to consist of saying things that offends/upsets/disagrees with a certain section of the Jewish population, mainly made up by the likes of Collier, Hodge, Oberman and Riley et al, but which doesn't offend thousands of other Jewish people. 

 

It's dangerous territory when such patently mentally deranged people appear to be setting the narrative on what amounts to "antisemitism" and distorting the concept in such a subjective manner. 

Oh, tweet that to her.  Looks libellous to me. 

[Creator Supreme]

Come on then Rico, if there's proof of racism by Labour Party members, councillors et al post it on here. We need to see it!

[Numero Veinticinco]

1 hour ago, moof said:

The people “setting the photo op” were Jewish people who support Williamson. Is it in the best taste? I’d say probably fuckin not like, but should they face threats of violence and intimidation or be kicked out of the party because they support a guy who’s falsely smeared as an antisemite? Of course not. It’s a witch hunt. 

I honestly couldn’t give a shit if she’s a Jew or not, mate. They’re not immune from criticism just because of their Jewishness. It’s cynical AF IMO. It’s using identity to make a political point. I don’t think she should be expelled for it, but calling for it shouldn’t be seen as antisemitic. 

 

Fuck, this whole labour antisemitism stuff is so fucking tedious. 

[Creator Supreme]

4 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Fuck, this whole labour antisemitism stuff is so fucking tedious. 

100% correct.

[sir roger]

When cyclists signed up for this year’s Big Ride For Palestine, which raises funds for a charity aiding Palestinian children in Gaza, they were expecting to finish with a rally in a Tower Hamlets park. But the council took a secret decision to ban the rally using a false interpretation of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) controversial “working definition” of antisemitism.

 

Internal mails, acquired by the Palestine Solidarity Campaign after submission of a freedom of information request, revealed that officials, influenced by the furore over antisemitism in the Labour Party, were concerned that references to “apartheid” and “ethnic cleansing” on the Big Ride’s website were antisemitic, according to the definition.

 

In fact, the definition says no such thing. The officials turned conditionality into one-sided certainty. The IHRA text explicitly states that examples it gives of critical discourse on Israel and Zionism “could be” seen as antisemitic, depending on context. It does not say that they are, no matter what, antisemitic. The council’s decision was therefore a clear and potentially illegal attack on freedom of speech.

 

Together with other critics of the definition, I warned that those hit hardest by the steamroller campaign to force Labour to adopt the IHRA text in full in September 2018 on the spurious grounds that it was the “universally accepted”, “gold standard” definition, without which the party would never resolve its perceived antisemitism problem, would be Palestinians.

 

Merely by describing their experience of Zionism (self-determination for Jews alone) as dispossession, denial of rights, ongoing Nakba – catastrophe – they would fall foul of the definition, and many would remain silent for fear of the consequences. Never mind that their experiences have been documented, in numerous definitive studies, by Jewish Israeli historians since the 1990s. We also cautioned that adoption by government, local authorities, universities and other public institutions would do nothing to protect Jews. In fact it was likely to make things worse. We were right.

 

Labour’s internal and external critics had no such qualms. For them, adoption of the IHRA was too little, too late. Relentless attacks on Corbyn and party officials handling complaints culminated in a hatchet-job Panorama programme on 10 July, “Is Labour Antisemitic?”, made by a known Jeremy Corbyn critic, John Ware. Disgracefully lacking balance, testimony came solely from Jewish members accusing the party of antisemitism. Not one alternative Jewish voice was heard. Numerous forensically detailed complaints were submitted to the BBC. Its reply claimed that the rationale of the programme was “how Labour is handling claims of antisemitism”, not “whether or not the problem exists”, when the title reflected the latter and not the former.

 

Not only had paying obeisance to the IHRA provided precious little respite for Labour, there was no sign that adoption of it anywhere was having any impact on actual antisemitism. News reports from across Europe and North America confirmed that far-right antisemitism was intensifying, but here in the UK there are strong signs that the IHRA has sown so much confusion it is having a negative impact on the quality, reliability and objectivity of reports issued by the Community Security Trust (CST), the private charity monitoring and combatting antisemitism for the establishment bodies of the Jewish community.

 

Its two recent reports – “Antisemitic Incidents January-June 2019” and “Engines of Hate: the online networks behind the Labour Party’s antisemitism crisis” – have attracted withering criticism for their muddled, possibly politically biased and selective scrutiny of social media hate. It’s not difficult to understand why. 

In the “Engines of Hate” report, the grounds for implying that the 36 accounts discussed contribute to the alleged antisemitism in Labour are flimsy at best. “Proof” of antisemitism is based, for example, on guilt by association, on assuming that defending the party against accusations of antisemitism is antisemitic, on judging that criticism of public figures like Margaret Hodge and Rachel Riley, who vociferously attack Corbyn and Labour for being antisemitic, is antisemitic.

 

This is shockingly unprofessional. David Rosenberg, who previously praised CST for the reliability of its data, concluded that many allegations about Twitter accounts are “unsubstantiated by evidence, distorted and exaggerated, and made in bad faith for factional political purposes”.

 

The redefinition of antisemitism, placing Israel at its centre as the “collective persecuted Jew among the nations”, has been a gradual process gaining momentum since the 1990s. It was not a new initiative formulated by the IHRA and adopted at its plenary meeting in March 2016, as that body wants us to believe.

 

Experts have widely condemned the text as being so vague as to fail the test of any definition – to be definitive – and while it purports to allow for so-called “legitimate” criticism of Israel by the conditionality of its examples, its promoters categorically want people to ignore provisos and treat all the examples as antisemitic, come what may. This was what the original drafter of the definition, Ken Stern, the former chief antisemitism researcher at the American Jewish Committee, intended back in 2004. He still sticks by that, but in recent years has tellingly spoken often and powerfully against its growing use to stifle freedom of speech.

 

But it’s the very vagueness of the IHRA that has licensed a free-for-all of interpretation, delighting opponents of Palestinian demands for equal rights, the right of return for refugees, an end to ethnic cleansing and acknowledgement of the Nakba, and sowing such a degree of confusion and cowardice as to prompt a London council to show blatant disregard for Article 10 of the UK Human Rights Act protecting freedom of speech.

The sooner this non-legally binding, free speech-chilling, prolix and muddled definition, which does nothing to help fight real antisemitism, is set aside and common sense on why criticism of Israel and its repressive policies towards the Palestinians must be unequivocally accepted as the expression of perfectly acceptable political opinion and judgement, the better we will all be placed to challenge the deepening discrimination and racial hatred causing such damage to our societies. 

 

The Tower Hamlets fiasco shows that the definition is severely impeding progress to reaching that end.

 

Antony Lerman is the former director of the Institute for Jewish Policy Research (JPR) and a senior fellow of the Bruno Kreisky Forum for International Dialogue, Vienna