Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Ken's comments couldn't have come at a better/worse time dependant on your politics, Sadiq Khan is busily distancing himself and no doubt many Labour supporters and those fighting local elections will be seriously wishing Ken had not become involved. John Mann also will have serious questions to answer regarding his conduct today. Surely the last thing to do as an MP is to have a spat in front of live TV cameras.


Oh well what's next to come along in the news, Cameron must be pleased he is not in the mire today.

And I agree with Otta. I'm no fan of many policies of the Israeii state, but Israel exists, and that's just a geo-political reality. It's not going away, so why people act like it should/needs to is beyond me.


Israel is surrounded by people who literally want to destroy it. Those who oppose its policies on certain areas - and that includes me - need to remember that.

Peckhamgatecrasher Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Very broadly speaking, someone who is anti western

> Middle East.

>

> If you want to get technical, then descendants of

> Shem, Ham, Japeth, ... Ishmael et al.

>

> Not someone who is anti-Jewish. If you mean

> anti-Jewish, then say that.



Fair enough. However, isn't there an argument to be made that over time it has become synonymous with solely anti-Jewish sentiment? I think a lot of people would struggle to see a difference. Although you're factually correct, have we perhaps reached the point where it is seen as a default term for hatred of Judaism?

Ok can someone explain things to me please.


For 100 of years there was anti-semitism across much of Europe. Shakespeare made fun of the Jewish money lender. This play was one of our course books at school. From my understanding in Britain in good times the monarchy were happy to use Jewish money when it was needed, then blamed the samme people when times were bad.


Then things got pretty horrid in parts of Eastern Europe, Russia and Germany. Clearly very horrid.


Then Britain made a hash up of the State of Palestine.


Then the US got seriously involved. And oil prices went through the roof. And then they choose sides between the arab countries they wanted to be friends with to guarantee the flow of oil and pissed off the rest. And then we all got involved in the various messes of Libya, Egypt, Iraq and Syria.


And Iran and Turkey retain massive geopolitical influence. And the US and their allies remain close to Israel.


It all sound like a friggin mess. As is Russia, Africa, SE Asia, and many of the other places the west/East intervenes in.


So I don't hate anyone. Well apart from Bono, but that is trivialising things.


What is wrong with talking about Israel's involvement in all of this? From what I understand there are a spectrum of opinions there too.


Did spend a week or so there in twenty years ago but views from that wont help this thread. I also expect Ken is bloody minded and wont do the decent thing and acknowledge when he has overstepped the mark.


Can someone explain things simply please?

Jah Lush Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This may help clear things up for some people.

>

> http://www.jewishsocialist.org.uk/news/item/statem

> ent-on-labours-problem-with-antisemitism-from-the-

> jewish-socialists-g?fb_action_ids=1015419463436857

> 3&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_ref=.VyJ65IREqRE.lik

> e


That really is mealy mouthed bullshit. Try this for a historical perspective from the left on left-wing anti-Semitism. http://www.thetower.org/article/the-holocaust-the-left-and-the-return-of-hate/

Jah Lush Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This may help clear things up for some people.

>

> http://www.jewishsocialist.org.uk/news/item/statem

> ent-on-labours-problem-with-antisemitism-from-the-

> jewish-socialists-g?fb_action_ids=1015419463436857

> 3&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_ref=.VyJ65IREqRE.lik

> e



Oh, so it's Ok because the Internet's found some Jewish people who are OK with this?


Bollox - the leadership of the Labour party is currently a disgrace - nasty extremism is just that at both ends of the political spectrum, and a major political party is now infested with it.

This is another good summary imo: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-antisemitism-row-ken-livingstone-naz-shah-jeremy-corbyn-a7006176.html


I think Ken should be kicked out of the party personally. He's too divisive a figure and his bringing Hitler into a rebuttal against allegations of antisemitism, is pretty bizarre and unhelpful.


That said, there is a lot of mischief making on the part of Guido et al. and I don't buy the accusation that there is some bigger problem with the Labour Party being antisemitic generally.

I also thought the statement Jah posted was very good (I wouldn't expect a statement from "Jewish Socialist" to be unbiased, but I agreed with a lot of it)


I think some people feel that criticism of Israel - when not accompanied by criticism of, say, Russia, Venezuela, Iran, etc. - is unbalanced and unjustified. Maybe it is. But that still doesn't make it racist...

I thought the statement Jah posted was utter horseshit


"Not all Zionists are Jews" - really? Show me some criticism of Zionists/Zionism that doesn't necessarily imply that they are Jews


"Others represent genuine criticism of Israeli policy and support for Palestinian rights, but expressed in clumsy and ambiguous language, which may unknowingly cross a line into antisemitism" I don't see much ambiguity or unknowingness in defending a suggested forced Jewish de-population of Israel by reference to Hitler


"Those making the charges now, did not see fit to bring them up at the time, under previous Labour leaders..." Because those making them were so remote from power within the Labour party that they could be ignored; now no longer the case


"The attack is coming from four main sources, who share agendas: to undermine Jeremy Corbyn as leader of Labour; to defend Israeli government policy from attack, however unjust, racist and harmful towards the Palestinian people; and to discredit those who make legitimate criticisms of Israeli policy or Zionism as a political ideology

? The Conservative Party


? Conservative-supporting media in Britain and pro-Zionist Israeli media sources


? Right-wing and pro-Zionist elements claiming to speak on behalf of the Jewish community


? Opponents of Jeremy Corbyn within the Labour party"


Far and away the most vocal attacks are coming from the Parliamentary Labour Party who recognise that (a) this is electoral poison and (b) to their credit, that sometimes things really are black and white and you have to pick a side.

Pro-Palestine-Anti-State-Of-Israel has been a leftie 'given' for as many years as I can remember, but let's be honest, Ken's lost the plot on this one.


There might have been some kind of point in there (more of a historical footnote than a point I suppose) - but the attempt at making it and, worse still, trying to turn it into anything of value or worth that somehow means something in the current debate defies belief.

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think some people feel that criticism of Israel

> - when not accompanied by criticism of, say,

> Russia, Venezuela, Iran, etc. - is unbalanced and

> unjustified. Maybe it is. But that still doesn't

> make it racist...


There was a very shouty man on LBC the other day (I'm on a week off - I give my brain a holiday... I don't listen to it on a regular basis... honest) who made that point, something along the lines of: "if you criticise Israel any more than any other nation than you're an anti-Semite". Apart from that being just totally idiotic logic, what irked me is the usually vocal compere just let it slide. Especially in comments sections of papers, Twitter, and the like, there's a really vocal group of people who are ready to strike as soon as any comment is made against Israel. It's like the Putin bots who jump to defend Russia's policies whenever some criticism of them appears. The worst outcome of all of this would be for people to get self conscious about criticising Israel's rubbish record on human rights and multi-culturalism.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Surprised at how many people take the 'oooh it's great it got approved, something is better than nothing' view. This is exactly Southwark council's approach, pandering to greedy developers for the absolute bare minimum of social and affordable housing. It's exactly why, under their leadership, only a fraction of social and affordable housing has been built in the borough - weirdly Mccash chose to highlight their own failures in his 'near unprecedented' (yet unbiased 😆) submission. All the objectors i have met support redevelopment, to benefit those in need of homes and the community - not change it forever. The council could and should be bolder, demand twice the social and affordable housing in these schemes, and not concede to 8 storeys of unneeded student bedsits. If it is a question of viability, publically disclose the business plan to prove how impossible it might be to turn a profit. Once the thing is built these sites can never be used for social or affordable housing. The council blows every opportunity, every time. Its pathetic. Developers admitted the scale was, in this instance, not required for viability. The student movements data seemed completely made up. The claim that 'students are taking up private rentals' was backed up with no data. There is empty student housing on denmark hill, needs to be fixed up but it's there already built. The council allows developers years to build cosy relationships with planners such that the final decision is a formality - substantiated objections are dismissed with wooly words and BS. Key meetings and consultations are scheduled deliberately to garner minimal engagement or objection. Local councillors, who we fund, ignore their constituents concerns. Those councillors that dare waiver in the predetermination are slapped down. Not very democratic. They've removed management and accountability by having no nomination agreement with any of the 'many london universities needing accommodation' - these direct lets MAKE MORE MONEY. A privately run firm will supposedly ensure everyone that those living there is actually a student and adheres to any conduct guidelines. There's no separation to residents - especially to ones on their own development. Could go on... We'll see how many of the 53 social/affordable units that we're all so happy to have approved actually get built. 
    • I am looking for 1 unit which is working for £50 cash. Thank you
    • Can’t recommend the company enough, great service. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...