Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?

[Rico1304]

16 minutes ago, Nelly-Torres said:

Can somebody PM me when she feels morally outraged enough to have a go at the antisemitism (the real stuff, not the "antisemites" who she's currently ranting about, who are also all, coincidentally, vocal critics of Israeli war crimes etc) in the Tory party and on the right? 

 

Her selective "outrage" says it all.

She’s a life long Labour supporter, why should she be arsed. Or is that the kind of AntiSemitism it’s ok to call out?  

 

I wonder why we need an ‘Other football’ thread on the MF, surely there’s just ‘football’?  (Apologies is mention of the MF triggers you). 

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

Holocaust denial is a bit trolly though. 

 

Only trolls try to diminish the suffering of an ethnic group of people by a right wing national government. 

[Denny Crane]

Rather apt he is doing Goves biography. 

 

 

 

[aRdja]

26 minutes ago, Strontium Dog said:

 

There's a bit of goalpost moving here, isn't there? Nobody has tried to deny anyone's freedom of speech. All they've done is derive conclusions from what that speech contains.

 

Chomsky is wrong when he claims that Holocaust denial has "no anti-Semitic implications", and he was wrong to sign a petition in support of a Holocaust denier. Quite why someone should be vilified for pointing these facts out is beyond me, but I suppose this is a brave new world, where Jews can be accused of having "agendas" when they complain about racism against them, and nobody bats an eyelid.

 

The preface he wrote is right here, not even that long.

 

https://chomsky.info/19801011/

 

it’s his speech that I haven’t read. Please send through a link if you have it. 

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

2 minutes ago, rico1304 said:

She’s a life long Labour supporter, why should she be arsed. Or is that the kind of AntiSemitism it’s ok to call out?  

 

I wonder why we need an ‘Other football’ thread on the MF, surely there’s just ‘football’?  (Apologies is mention of the MF triggers you). 

 

She's very passionate about it. I just find it strange that her passion appears to be mixed with an implied tolerance of antisemitism, depending on who has allegedly behaved in such a way. I think that makes her motivations questionable. 

[aRdja]

54 minutes ago, rico1304 said:

You’ve hit the fucking nail on the head there! 

 

Have a a look at the Dunkula thread and then compare and contrast.  

I couldn’t find Chomsky’s comment on that sorry mate. I googled “Chomsky Dunkula” to no avail? What did he say? I’d be surprised if he knew who he was to be honest. 

[Rico1304]

1 minute ago, aRdja said:

I couldn’t find Chomsky’s comment on that sorry mate. I googled “Chomsky Dunkula” to no avail? What did he say? I’d be surprised if he knew who he was to be honest. 

Apologies, I meant the reaction on here. 

 

People now defending free speech because it’s Chomskywere on the other side of the fence when it was Count D.  

[aRdja]

1 minute ago, rico1304 said:

Apologies, I meant the reaction on here. 

 

People now defending free speech because it’s Chomskywere on the other side of the fence when it was Count D.  

None of us are Noam Chomsky! I’m sure most of us would be happy if Faurisson lost his job, never earned a living again and went bankrupt.

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

2 minutes ago, rico1304 said:

Apologies, I meant the reaction on here. 

 

People now defending free speech because it’s Chomskywere on the other side of the fence when it was Count D.  

 

Are they? Or are they highlighting Chomsky's decision to defend free speech, which is a totally different thing to "people now defending free speech" 

[cloggypop]

15 minutes ago, Denny Crane said:

Rather apt he is doing Goves biography. 

 

 

 

Maybe he's never heard of the cunt. I know I haven't. 

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

3 minutes ago, aRdja said:

None of us are Noam Chomsky! I’m sure most of us would be happy if Faurisson lost his job, never earned a living again and went bankrupt.

He’s suggesting that those defending Chomsky and/or Chonsky’s actions in regard to free speech are hypocritical because of the views shared in the Dankula thread. I would be surprised if I wasn’t pretty consistent across both threads, but whatever. Nobody here was defending Holocaust denial as free speech, which would be the accurate comparison. 

[cloggypop]

If Channel 4 had any sense at all they should be throwing money at Chomsky to get him on 8 out of 10 cats does countdown. 

[moof]

I would pay large sums of money to see Chomsk debate Rachel Riley on this issue 

[Jairzinho]

16 minutes ago, moof said:

I would pay large sums of money to see Chomsk debate Rachel Riley on this issue 

Like a lion on roids fighting a quadriplegic hamster.

[Numero Veinticinco]

21 minutes ago, moof said:

Chomsk

Fucking hell, know him well do you mate?

[Jairzinho]

Chommo.

[SasaS]

He and Nomy go way back.

[aRdja]

40 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

He’s suggesting that those defending Chomsky and/or Chonsky’s actions in regard to free speech are hypocritical because of the views shared in the Dankula thread. I would be surprised if I wasn’t pretty consistent across both threads, but whatever. Nobody here was defending Holocaust denial as free speech, which would be the accurate comparison. 

I don’t understand the comparison though. If someone here called a poster defending Dunkula’s right to free speech an anti-semite, whilst giving Chomsky a “free pass”, then yeah I could certainly see hypocrisy there. Chomsky wasn’t the one denying holocaust ever happened though!

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

I'm not sure which bit of Rachel Riley's C4 News interview with Krishnan GM is the funniest. 

 

The bit where she says "I don't look like a typical jew" or the bit where KGM discusses the right to legitimate crticism of Israel and she responds "I'm a nice person." 

 

Christ. Stick to the numbers and having a good arse! 

[Section_31]

3 minutes ago, Nelly-Torres said:

I'm not sure which bit of Rachel Riley's C4 News interview with Krishnan GM is the funniest. 

 

The bit where she says "I don't look like a typical jew" or the bit where KGM discusses the right to legitimate crticism of Israel and she responds "I'm a nice person." 

 

Christ. Stick to the numbers and having a good arse! 

I think it's a typical example of where someone wades into a subject they don't really understand and are too embarrassed to admit it, so just start losing their shit at everyone. 

 

We've all done it, I know I have. 

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

1 hour ago, cloggypop said:

If Channel 4 had any sense at all they should be throwing money at Chomsky to get him on 8 out of 10 cats does countdown. 

I'm not sure that she'll be on it for much longer. Surely, given her Twitter outrage, she'll refuse to work with Jimmy Carr again? 

 

https://www.chortle.co.uk/news/2018/12/03/41826/comedy_central_rapped_over_jimmy_carrs_antisemitic_joke#

[AngryOfTuebrook]

2 hours ago, Boss said:

This is the thing I hate about twitter. She posts a single page, highlighting a single paragraph, from an entire book, and uses it to denounce Chomsky because Faurisson (the author) put an excerpt from an article Chomsky once wrote about free speech in his book - without Chomsky's permission. 

 

Then her sheeple followers accept it as fact and next time someone mentions Chomsky they'll say "He's a Holocaust denier him" "Is he?" "Yeah, one of his hero's was this guy who said the Holocaust didn't happen". This is why we have the political class we have running this country. This Rachel Riley twitter meltdown is who we are as a society, in a microcosm. 

Agree with all of that.  Also, the sudden, intense and angry focus on her, just because she's a TV celebrity who tweeted a few stupid things, is not particularly edifying.

 

An ugly episode all round.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

2 hours ago, rico1304 said:

 Nope, Swarwkbox made something up.  Fancy that? 

 

2 hours ago, Strontium Dog said:

 

The IPSO has deemed Skwawkbox to officially be fake news. It's essentially the left-wing equivalent of Breitbart, and anyone citing it should be laughed at.

To be fair to Skwawkbox, they didn't make this claim up.  They reported (factually) that someone on Twitter had made the claim and they contacted Riley's agent for a comment on it.  Obviously, that's not great journalism by any stretch, but nor is it making stuff up.

 

Also, of course, it's not true that "IPSO has deemed Skwawkbox to officially be fake news".  As far as I'm aware, IPSO doesn't do that.  You've been swallowing Guido uncritically again.

 

What IPSO actually said was that in one instance the Mail Online had not breached any rules  by saying Skwawkbox "spread fake news" when they over-zealously ran with a story that subsequently proved to be untrue.  (Again, not great journalism, but nor is it making stuff up.)

 

Here's the truth about IPSO (if you're arsed about the truth).

 

https://www.ipso.co.uk/rulings-and-resolution-statements/ruling/?id=16690-17

 

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

1 hour ago, Section_31 said:

I think it's a typical example of where someone wades into a subject they don't really understand and are too embarrassed to admit it, so just start losing their shit at everyone. 

 

We've all done it, I know I have. 

Which is why I say fair fucks to that Owen Bennett bloke: he said something which was wrong, got called out on it and held his hands up. We move on.

[aRdja]

1 hour ago, Nelly-Torres said:

I'm not sure which bit of Rachel Riley's C4 News interview with Krishnan GM is the funniest. 

 

The bit where she says "I don't look like a typical jew" or the bit where KGM discusses the right to legitimate crticism of Israel and she responds "I'm a nice person." 

 

Christ. Stick to the numbers and having a good arse! 

 

A pretty grim take on that comment.