Amazing that Corbynistas have such a problem with far right, extremist foreign powers, given how willing they are to push Kremlin talking points after the first ever chemical attack on British soil.
Trusting Theresa May and the UK’s utterly discredited security establishment about as far as you can throw them is just common sense and does not equal pushing ‘Kremlin talking points’.
I remember being here for the 2004 US election, at least on election night. Some politics blog must have sent me here for updates. (was going to say twitter, but of course there was a time when twitter didn't exist, strange as it may seem).
I remember the 2008 US presidential as being the first time I bet any significant amount on a political contest, so I can't claim to be an early adopter. Congratulations & best wishes to the great Smithson, nontheless.
Streeting will be deselected, along with a handful of other hard-right nutcases that really shouldn't be in the party. Then life will go on.
Do you really believe Streeting is hard-right? Really? Really??
*shakes head*
If you do not worship Jeremy and overlook his anti-Semitic blind spot, you are, by definition, a hard-right, neo-liberal, pro-austerity, red Tory. Obviously.
No, just being tumescently pro-war, obsessively publically supportive of a racist, far-right extremist foreign power, relentlessly pro-privatisation and a perpetual darling of the hard-right media will do it. And not having any ostensibly left-wing beliefs ever knowingly displayed. A simple ‘if the cap fits’ kind of assessment, really. But no, of course he is disliked by Labour members because he is apparently Jewish, though it seems noone actually knew this anyway.
You are the one with the obsession and problem, Joff. Very odd.
Which "racist, far-right extremist foreign power" are you referring to?
Obviously Israel, one of Streeting’s unfathomable obsessions and a very unsavoury one.
Israel is a far right extremist foreign power...? Surely to maintain the pretence you at least need to refer to the current Israeli government?
Seems strange to remember now that down to the 1980s Israel as an avowedly Socialist state (epitomised by the kibbutzim movement) was the darling of many on the left. Look at it now!
Good night everybody.
Labour in the 1940's and 1950's was pro-Israel. And right up to the 1970's, 60-70% of British Jews voted Labour. These days 10-15% do. This is a community that thinks that the modern Labour Party hates them. They may be wrong to think that, but people like J Wiseman would not reassure them.
The UK Jewish population have trended Tory for a long time, as you pooint out. Nothing to do with Corbyn.
But, everything to do with people who think the way that you do.
I find it quite bizarre how all bright young things that are most vocal supports of jezza are also extremely vocal in regards to any perceived anti-LGBT or anti-muslim comments such that the likes of Germaine Greer and Peter tachell are bigots that must be no-platformed, but their hero's blind spot to anti-jewish stuff doesn't detract from their hero worship.
The simple answer is they are pro-Palestine, and therefore via Israel, and then, combined with the old NWO/ Jewish Conspiracy its a short skip and a jump to full blown anti-Semitism.
I think it is a pretty big skip in fairness. I'm sympathetic to the plight of the Palestinians, there's no quick steps to go over into anti-semitism.
I think most people are sympathetic to the Palestinians, I am too, but the whole Middle East thing poisons so much.
ad
Calm down mate, sounds lovely.
My main point is that Israel (at least in its current incarnation as a regionally destabilising racist terror state) is viewed negatively by a majority of the country at large, yet defended rabidly by a majority of the westminster political and media establishment (including a hugely disproportionate number of Blairite Labour MPs.)
These are the same one as those who always walk in lockstep with any call for bombing other countries. Israel is a vital rottweiller for the interest of US and UK elites in the middle east and therefore those parts of the Labour Party that are bought and sold toadies of the transatlantic security establishment invariably take up rhetorical arms for Israel whenever needed, too. Obviously lobby money flows freely and fulsomely in the other direction too, as shown in that al-Jazeera doc.
A leader of the opposition whose sympathies lie with the Palestinians is not in the interest of the UK security apparatus, their toadies in the Labour party, or their close allies in the Israeli government. That’s what this is about.
Except his sympathies are not just with the Palestinians, but with terrorist groups like Hamas who use children to blow up civilians and openly.call for genocide in their charter.
Where has he expressly offered support to the methods of Hamas (who were of course anyway created as a project of the Israeli secret services in the first place as a counterbalance to the PLO)?
Streeting will be deselected, along with a handful of other hard-right nutcases that really shouldn't be in the party. Then life will go on.
Do you really believe Streeting is hard-right? Really? Really??
*shakes head*
If you do not worship Jeremy and overlook his anti-Semitic blind spot, you are, by definition, a hard-right, neo-liberal, pro-austerity, red Tory. Obviously.
No, just being tumescently pro-war, obsessively publically supportive of a racist, far-right extremist foreign power, relentlessly pro-privatisation and a perpetual darling of the hard-right media will do it. And not having any ostensibly left-wing beliefs ever knowingly displayed. A simple ‘if the cap fits’ kind of assessment, really. But no, of course he is disliked by Labour members because he is apparently Jewish, though it seems noone actually knew this anyway.
You are the one with the obsession and problem, Joff. Very odd.
Which "racist, far-right extremist foreign power" are you referring to?
Obviously Israel, one of Streeting’s unfathomable obsessions and a very unsavoury one.
Israel is a far right extremist foreign power...? Surely to maintain the pretence you at least need to refer to the current Israeli government?
Seems strange to remember now that down to the 1980s Israel as an avowedly Socialist state (epitomised by the kibbutzim movement) was the darling of many on the left. Look at it now!
Good night everybody.
Labour in the 1940's and 1950's was pro-Israel. And right up to the 1970's, 60-70% of British Jews voted Labour. These days 10-15% do. This is a community that thinks that the modern Labour Party hates them. They may be wrong to think that, but people like J Wiseman would not reassure them.
The people who run the Labour party do not believe that anti-Semitism is racism. They believe that Jews are rich and powerful - oppressors rather than the oppressed. The Jews should be grateful to the left, so the thinking goes, for standing up for them in the 1930s; they should know their place.
Christ you are a buffoon. Where do you dredge this cack up from? Are you actually Nick Cohen?
I listen to what the far left says and read what it writes. I understand that you are comfortable with its anti-Semitism and Jew-baiting.
Amazing that Corbynistas have such a problem with far right, extremist foreign powers, given how willing they are to push Kremlin talking points after the first ever chemical attack on British soil.
Trusting Theresa May and the UK’s utterly discredited security establishment about as far as you can throw them is just common sense and does not equal pushing ‘Kremlin talking points’.
And Merkel and Macron of course. A nerve agent only ever manufactured by the Russians used to kill a Russian dissident following Putin saying traitors would die and followed by Russian state TV making threats against dissidents. But of course it's the Tories where suspicion should be laid.
Just admit it. You sympathise with anti-Western regimes more than Western governments and will always follow narratives they are peddling.
I find it quite bizarre how all bright young things that are most vocal supports of jezza are also extremely vocal in regards to any perceived anti-LGBT or anti-muslim comments such that the likes of Germaine Greer and Peter tachell are bigots that must be no-platformed, but their hero's blind spot to anti-jewish stuff doesn't detract from their hero worship.
The simple answer is they are pro-Palestine, and therefore via Israel, and then, combined with the old NWO/ Jewish Conspiracy its a short skip and a jump to full blown anti-Semitism.
I think it is a pretty big skip in fairness. I'm sympathetic to the plight of the Palestinians, there's no quick steps to go over into anti-semitism.
I think most people are sympathetic to the Palestinians, I am too, but the whole Middle East thing poisons so much.
ad
Calm down mate, sounds lovely.
My main point is that Israel (at least in its current incarnation as a regionally destabilising racist terror state) is viewed negatively by a majority of the country at large, yet defended rabidly by a majority of the westminster political and media establishment (including a hugely disproportionate number of Blairite Labour MPs.)
These are the same one as those who always walk in lockstep Obviously lobby money flows freely and fulsomely in the other direction too, as shown in that al-Jazeera doc.
A leader of the opposition whose sympathies lie with the Palestinians is not in the interest of the UK security apparatus, their toadies in the Labour party, or their close allies in the Israeli government. That’s what this is about.
Except his sympathies are not just with the Palestinians, but with terrorist groups like Hamas who use children to blow up civilians and openly.call for genocide in their charter.
Where has he expressly offered support to the methods of Hamas (who were of course anyway created as a project of the Israeli secret services in the first place as a counterbalance to the PLO)?
Where has he unequivocally condemned their violence and their beliefs. One speech, one article, anything?
I find it quite bizarre how all bright young things that are most vocal supports of jezza are also extremely vocal in regards to any perceived anti-LGBT or anti-muslim comments such that the likes of Germaine Greer and Peter tachell are bigots that must be no-platformed, but their hero's blind spot to anti-jewish stuff doesn't detract from their hero worship.
The simple answer is they are pro-Palestine, and therefore via Israel, and then, combined with the old NWO/ Jewish Conspiracy its a short skip and a jump to full blown anti-Semitism.
I think it is a pretty big skip in fairness. I'm sympathetic to the plight of the Palestinians, there's no quick steps to go over into anti-semitism.
I think most people are sympathetic to the Palestinians, I am too, but the whole Middle East thing poisons so much.
ad
Calm down mate, sounds lovely.
My main point is that Israel (at least in its current incarnation as a regionally destabilising racist terror state) is viewed negatively by a majority of the country at large, yet defended rabidly by a majority of the westminster political and media establishment (including a hugely disproportionate number of Blairite Labour MPs.)
A leader of the opposition whose sympathies lie with the Palestinians is not in the interest of the UK security apparatus, their toadies in the Labour party, or their close allies in the Israeli government. That’s what this is about.
Except his sympathies are not just with the Palestinians, but with terrorist groups like Hamas who use children to blow up civilians and openly.call for genocide in their charter.
Where has he expressly offered support to the methods of Hamas (who were of course anyway created as a project of the Israeli secret services in the first place as a counterbalance to the PLO)?
Unlike his two closest allies and the IRA, he doesn't openly endorse their terroristic methods, he just turns a blind eye to them while still treating them as friends.
Amazing that Corbynistas have such a problem with far right, extremist foreign powers, given how willing they are to push Kremlin talking points after the first ever chemical attack on British soil.
Trusting Theresa May and the UK’s utterly discredited security establishment about as far as you can throw them is just common sense and does not equal pushing ‘Kremlin talking points’.
Seems strange to remember now that down to the 1980s Israel as an avowedly Socialist state (epitomised by the kibbutzim movement) was the darling of many on the left. Look at it now!
Good night everybody.
That's true - IIRC the USSR recognised it before the USA, for exactly that reason. I think that many people across the spectrum would agree that the current government is nationalist and oppressive (which is not to dispute the country's right to exist and to elect whoever they wish, as well as their very legitimate fears).
Of course, all that should be completely irrelevant to anti-semitism - it should be possible (and not anti-semitic) to be very critical of Israeli policy without having an iota of prejudice towards people of Jewish background: that's Corbyn's position and mine and I think a pretty common Labour view. Labour Friends of Israel doesn't have much time for the current government. The reverse is sort of true too - there are far-right evangelical Christians in the US who presuumably believe Jews are misguided about religion but think that Israel's government is terrific.
I remember being here for the 2004 US election, at least on election night. Some politics blog must have sent me here for updates. (was going to say twitter, but of course there was a time when twitter didn't exist, strange as it may seem).
Streeting will be deselected, along with a handful of other hard-right nutcases that really shouldn't be in the party. Then life will go on.
Lose the Jews, eh?
I don’t know. I’m not the one who seems to have an obsession with who is or isn’t jewish. (Is Wes? I just had him down as a careerist quisling.)
Calling a man you now know is Jewish by the name of a Nazi collaborator. How tasteful.
I dont know he is Jewish. There doesnt seem to be anything online suggesting he is, from a quick look. I think it is Joff Wild that is the obsessive Jewfinder General, not me.
Seems strange to remember now that down to the 1980s Israel as an avowedly Socialist state (epitomised by the kibbutzim movement) was the darling of many on the left. Look at it now!
Good night everybody.
That's true - IIRC the USSR recognised it before the USA, for exactly that reason. I think that many people across the spectrum would agree that the current government is nationalist and oppressive (which is not to dispute the country's right to exist and to elect whoever they wish, as well as their very legitimate fears).
Of course, all that should be completely irrelevant to anti-semitism - it should be possible (and not anti-semitic) to be very critical of Israeli policy without having an iota of prejudice towards people of Jewish background: that's Corbyn's position and mine and I think a pretty common Labour view. Labour Friends of Israel doesn't have much time for the current government. The reverse is sort of true too - there are far-right evangelical Christians in the US who presuumably believe Jews are misguided about religion but think that Israel's government is terrific.
Jeremy is just so unlucky to be constantly caught in the company of Jew-baiters. I mean, who could possibly think a painting depicting men with thick lips and big noses counting money on the backs of the enslaved is in any way anti-Semitic?
Streeting will be deselected, along with a handful of other hard-right nutcases that really shouldn't be in the party. Then life will go on.
Do you really believe Streeting is hard-right? Really? Really??
*shakes head*
If you do not worship Jeremy and overlook his anti-Semitic blind spot, you are, by definition, a hard-right, neo-liberal, pro-austerity, red Tory. Obviously.
No, just being tumescently pro-war, obsessively publically supportive of a racist, far-right extremist foreign power, relentlessly pro-privatisation and a perpetual darling of the hard-right media will do it. And not having any ostensibly left-wing beliefs ever knowingly displayed. A simple ‘if the cap fits’ kind of assessment, really. But no, of course he is disliked by Labour members because he is apparently Jewish, though it seems noone actually knew this anyway.
You are the one with the obsession and problem, Joff. Very odd.
Which "racist, far-right extremist foreign power" are you referring to?
Obviously Israel, one of Streeting’s unfathomable obsessions and a very unsavoury one.
Israel is a far right extremist foreign power...? Surely to maintain the pretence you at least need to refer to the current Israeli government?
Its current government is particularly appalling but I cant remember an Israeli government that wasnt based firmly around violent racial supremacy and colonisation?
Anyway, would you not say, for example ‘North Korea is an unstable, totalitarian foreign power’, when you actually mean its current government? Simple semantics.
Would you class any muslim states in a similar fashion?
There are some very nasty voices on here this evening. Beyond the usual level of 'banter'
I would urge the mods who might still be online to review things and perhaps put a few people on a short time-out until they can moderate their tone and content back to what most of PB users would like to encounter.
Robust debate is one thing - but we aren't getting that tonight. Reason is being ignored and people are showing themselves up.
Streeting will be deselected, along with a handful of other hard-right nutcases that really shouldn't be in the party. Then life will go on.
Do you really believe Streeting is hard-right? Really? Really??
*shakes head*
If you do not worship Jeremy and overlook his anti-Semitic blind spot, you are, by definition, a hard-right, neo-liberal, pro-austerity, red Tory. Obviously.
No, just being tumescently pro-war, obsessively publically supportive of a racist, far-right extremist foreign power, relentlessly pro-privatisation and a perpetual darling of the hard-right media will do it. And not having any ostensibly left-wing beliefs ever knowingly displayed. A simple ‘if the cap fits’ kind of assessment, really. But no, of course he is disliked by Labour members because he is apparently Jewish, though it seems noone actually knew this anyway.
You are the one with the obsession and problem, Joff. Very odd.
Which "racist, far-right extremist foreign power" are you referring to?
Obviously Israel, one of Streeting’s unfathomable obsessions and a very unsavoury one.
Israel is a far right extremist foreign power...? Surely to maintain the pretence you at least need to refer to the current Israeli government?
Its current government is particularly appalling but I cant remember an Israeli government that wasnt based firmly around violent racial supremacy and colonisation?
Anyway, would you not say, for example ‘North Korea is an unstable, totalitarian foreign power’, when you actually mean its current government? Simple semantics.
Would you class any muslim states in a similar fashion?
Another favourite of our ruling class, Saudi Arabia, has many similarities.
Corbyn’s anti semitism is just a dog whistle to harvest the Islamic vote en masse - let’s be honest about this please.
No, it’s not. It’s much more connected to Soviet anti-Semitism.
So gaining the Muslim vote is just an added bonus ?
I think labelling all moslems anti-semitic is not only racist, but also profoundly wrong. For what it’s worth the moslem population of Islington North is relatively low. Corbyn never needed a moslem vote to be elected.
There are some very nasty voices on here this evening. Beyond the usual level of 'banter'
I would urge the mods who might still be online to review things and perhaps put a few people on a short time-out until they can moderate their tone and content back to what most of PB users would like to encounter.
Robust debate is one thing - but we aren't getting that tonight. Reason is being ignored and people are showing themselves up.
Totally disagree. We’re all politically engaged adults. It’s important that on a site like this people’s true views are expressed and digested. No sugar-coating.
I will take nothing from anyone who cites anything from skwawkbox. Try again with something reputable
Given that it is just a list of Corbyn-signed EDMs related to combatting anti-semitism, it is pretty hard to refute with such a weak comeback.
Signing any number of EDMs proves nothing.
It is his actions (or lack of them) since becoming leader that is under scrutiny. As you well know.
It is also the company he has chosen to keep throughout his career. It is also the other causes he has chosen to espouse. All of that comes together to paint a very clear picture.
You know this.
We also now know where you stand. And what you stand for.
There are some very nasty voices on here this evening. Beyond the usual level of 'banter'
I would urge the mods who might still be online to review things and perhaps put a few people on a short time-out until they can moderate their tone and content back to what most of PB users would like to encounter.
Robust debate is one thing - but we aren't getting that tonight. Reason is being ignored and people are showing themselves up.
Totally disagree. We’re all politically engaged adults. It’s important that on a site like this people’s true views are expressed and digested. No sugar-coating.
Why do you think Jezza supported all the EDMs I just posted?
There are some very nasty voices on here this evening. Beyond the usual level of 'banter'
I would urge the mods who might still be online to review things and perhaps put a few people on a short time-out until they can moderate their tone and content back to what most of PB users would like to encounter.
Robust debate is one thing - but we aren't getting that tonight. Reason is being ignored and people are showing themselves up.
Totally disagree. We’re all politically engaged adults. It’s important that on a site like this people’s true views are expressed and digested. No sugar-coating.
Why do you think Jezza supported all the EDMs I just posted?
Why wouldn’t he?
I am much more interested in why he has failed to challenge the anti-Semitism of the people he has shared platforms with for many years and why so many Jewbaiters on the far left turn out to be his friends.
There are some very nasty voices on here this evening. Beyond the usual level of 'banter'
I would urge the mods who might still be online to review things and perhaps put a few people on a short time-out until they can moderate their tone and content back to what most of PB users would like to encounter.
Robust debate is one thing - but we aren't getting that tonight. Reason is being ignored and people are showing themselves up.
Totally disagree. We’re all politically engaged adults. It’s important that on a site like this people’s true views are expressed and digested. No sugar-coating.
Why do you think Jezza supported all the EDMs I just posted?
It is very easy to sign up to any number of EDMs - it is very different to actually taking action.
It is his lack of action to tackle anti-semitism since he became leader that is at the root of today's events.
If he really wanted to take a stand - he could have done. Ken Livingstone could have been expelled from Labour. The Chakrabati report could have actually had some teeth and delivered real action.
Streeting will be deselected, along with a handful of other hard-right nutcases that really shouldn't be in the party. Then life will go on.
Do you really believe Streeting is hard-right? Really? Really??
*shakes head*
If you do not worship Jeremy and overlook his anti-Semitic blind spot, you are, by definition, a hard-right, neo-liberal, pro-austerity, red Tory. Obviously.
No, just being tumescently pro-war, obsessively publically supportive of a racist, far-right extremist foreign power, relentlessly pro-privatisation and a perpetual darling of the hard-right media will do it. And not having any ostensibly left-wing beliefs ever knowingly displayed. A simple ‘if the cap fits’ kind of assessment, really. But no, of course he is disliked by Labour members because he is apparently Jewish, though it seems noone actually knew this anyway.
You are the one with the obsession and problem, Joff. Very odd.
Which "racist, far-right extremist foreign power" are you referring to?
Obviously Israel, one of Streeting’s unfathomable obsessions and a very unsavoury one.
Israel is a far right extremist foreign power...? Surely to maintain the pretence you at least need to refer to the current Israeli government?
Its current government is particularly appalling but I cant remember an Israeli government that wasnt based firmly around violent racial supremacy and colonisation?
Anyway, would you not say, for example ‘North Korea is an unstable, totalitarian foreign power’, when you actually mean its current government? Simple semantics.
Would you class any muslim states in a similar fashion?
Another favourite of our ruling class, Saudi Arabia, has many similarities.
There are some very nasty voices on here this evening. Beyond the usual level of 'banter'
I would urge the mods who might still be online to review things and perhaps put a few people on a short time-out until they can moderate their tone and content back to what most of PB users would like to encounter.
Robust debate is one thing - but we aren't getting that tonight. Reason is being ignored and people are showing themselves up.
Totally disagree. We’re all politically engaged adults. It’s important that on a site like this people’s true views are expressed and digested. No sugar-coating.
Corbyn’s anti semitism is just a dog whistle to harvest the Islamic vote en masse - let’s be honest about this please.
No, it’s not. It’s much more connected to Soviet anti-Semitism.
So gaining the Muslim vote is just an added bonus ?
I think labelling all moslems anti-semitic is not only racist, but also profoundly wrong. For what it’s worth the moslem population of Islington North is relatively low. Corbyn never needed a moslem vote to be elected.
I do think a majority of Muslims are anti Israel that can lead to other things,just look at my constitucy of Bradford west.
First we had George ( Israel free zone) Galloway and then our own anti Semitic or Israel labour MP Shah.
There are some very nasty voices on here this evening. Beyond the usual level of 'banter'
I would urge the mods who might still be online to review things and perhaps put a few people on a short time-out until they can moderate their tone and content back to what most of PB users would like to encounter.
Robust debate is one thing - but we aren't getting that tonight. Reason is being ignored and people are showing themselves up.
Totally disagree. We’re all politically engaged adults. It’s important that on a site like this people’s true views are expressed and digested. No sugar-coating.
Why do you think Jezza supported all the EDMs I just posted?
It is very easy to sign up to any number of EDMs - it is very different to actually taking action.
It is his lack of action to tackle anti-semitism since he became leader that is at the root of today's events.
If he really wanted to take a stand - he could have done. Ken Livingstone could have been expelled from Labour. The Chakrabati report could have actually had some teeth and delivered real action.
But no.
Actions are what matter more than EDM signings.
Plus we know people suspended for anti semitism are quietly being let back in and even given jobs
Corbyn’s anti semitism is just a dog whistle to harvest the Islamic vote en masse - let’s be honest about this please.
No, it’s not. It’s much more connected to Soviet anti-Semitism.
So gaining the Muslim vote is just an added bonus ?
I think labelling all moslems anti-semitic is not only racist, but also profoundly wrong. For what it’s worth the moslem population of Islington North is relatively low. Corbyn never needed a moslem vote to be elected.
Yes, his constituency was probably about 2% Muslim when he was first elected in 1983, with 40% of the vote.
Corbyn’s anti semitism is just a dog whistle to harvest the Islamic vote en masse - let’s be honest about this please.
No, it’s not. It’s much more connected to Soviet anti-Semitism.
So gaining the Muslim vote is just an added bonus ?
I think labelling all moslems anti-semitic is not only racist, but also profoundly wrong. For what it’s worth the moslem population of Islington North is relatively low. Corbyn never needed a moslem vote to be elected.
I do think a majority of Muslims are anti Israel that can lead to other things,just look at my constitucy of Bradford west.
First we had George ( Israel free zone) Galloway and then our own anti Semitic or Israel labour MP Shah.
Much of the anti-Jewish feeling within many Muslims (not all) derives from the Koran.
Palestinians might have grounds for disliking Israelis but it does not explain why so many Muslims should so often be anti-Jewish. The roots lie in their religion and culture. And that raises tough questions which those who seek to explain it away by referring to Israel’s policies or existence don’t wish to consider let alone answer.
Anybody got any idea when a Labour moderate will actually make a proper bloody stand? By that I mean resign the Whip and to hell with the consequences.
Otherwise, after today's events, they should hang their heads in shame.
Anybody got any idea when a Labour moderate will actually make a proper bloody stand? By that I mean resign the Whip and to hell with the consequences.
Otherwise, after today's events, they should hang their heads in shame.
They tried that in 2016 and Corbyn increased his majority in the leadership election.
Anybody got any idea when a Labour moderate will actually make a proper bloody stand? By that I mean resign the Whip and to hell with the consequences.
Otherwise, after today's events, they should hang their heads in shame.
Anybody got any idea when a Labour moderate will actually make a proper bloody stand? By that I mean resign the Whip and to hell with the consequences.
Will be interesting to see how this evolves - but I don’t think being a gay man of Pakistani heritage can be an automatic “get out of jail free” card when a former partner disputes your claims.
If you were genuinely concerned about your clients family members safety in Pakistan, surely you’d stop when Cummings removed the statement that worries you, rather than go on to publish a letter, confirming its veracity and using it as an opportunity to attack your clients former partner?
If you were genuinely concerned about your clients family members safety in Pakistan, surely you’d stop when Cummings removed the statement that worries you, rather than go on to publish a letter, confirming its veracity and using it as an opportunity to attack your clients former partner?
Hold on. Are you saying Shahmir's family are not unsafe because of this disclosure?
Anybody got any idea when a Labour moderate will actually make a proper bloody stand? By that I mean resign the Whip and to hell with the consequences.
When Corbyn decisively loses a General Election.
Simon Danczuk's dreadful showing in the GE 2017 (admittedly for different reasons) shows what happens when the red rosette drops from your lapel, this could be an interesting test of Labour
Why was it for Shahmir to tell Vote Leave's director of compliance that Vote Leave had behaved legally and properly?
And why has he changed his tune? Was he lying then, or is he lying now?
...and has he stopped beating his wife?
You are assuming the statements are incompatible. That's not necessarily true (his understanding of what constituted "legal and proper" may have changed in the interim, he may have recalled something he'd forgotten, and so on).
If you were genuinely concerned about your clients family members safety in Pakistan, surely you’d stop when Cummings removed the statement that worries you, rather than go on to publish a letter, confirming its veracity and using it as an opportunity to attack your clients former partner?
Hold on. Are you saying Shahmir's family are not unsafe because of this disclosure?
If they are unsafe, why confirm the claim is true in a letter attacking the former partner? Surely removing the claim (which Cummings promptly complied with) should be your sole goal.
One comment in Cummings' blog that raises more questions than it answers is this:
"In 2016, Shahmir told VL’s director of compliance, who took detailed contemporaneous notes, that VL behaved legally and properly..."
Why was it for Shahmir to tell Vote Leave's director of compliance that Vote Leave had behaved legally and properly?
More to the point, is he competent (then or now) to decide that? One does not ask one's employee if one's action is legal, one asks a lawyer. "My actions were legal: my employee says so!" is not a convincing defence.
It is hard to change people’s minds. We are evolved creatures. If we were all dopey dupes we wouldn’t be here, our ancestors would have all been killed. You’re reading this because your ancestors survived a brutal competition of sexual politics, this involves deceit and perceiving deceit, and this makes it an extremely non-trivial task to change minds at scale reliably in a competitive landscape. If it were a trivial task, our entire world would be unrecognisably different. People are always selling the idea that they have a magic bullet of persuasion. You won’t get poor by shorting such promises.
If you were genuinely concerned about your clients family members safety in Pakistan, surely you’d stop when Cummings removed the statement that worries you, rather than go on to publish a letter, confirming its veracity and using it as an opportunity to attack your clients former partner?
Hold on. Are you saying Shahmir's family are not unsafe because of this disclosure?
If they are unsafe, why confirm the claim is true in a letter attacking the former partner? Surely removing the claim (which Cummings promptly complied with) should be your sole goal.
Don't ask me, ask Bindmans.
I'm not asking you about Bindman's belief, I'm asking you about your belief. Do you believe . Shahmir's family are unsafe because of this disclosure? Or not? Or "don't know"?
It is hard to change people’s minds. We are evolved creatures. If we were all dopey dupes we wouldn’t be here, our ancestors would have all been killed. You’re reading this because your ancestors survived a brutal competition of sexual politics, this involves deceit and perceiving deceit, and this makes it an extremely non-trivial task to change minds at scale reliably in a competitive landscape. If it were a trivial task, our entire world would be unrecognisably different. People are always selling the idea that they have a magic bullet of persuasion. You won’t get poor by shorting such promises.
If you were genuinely concerned about your clients family members safety in Pakistan, surely you’d stop when Cummings removed the statement that worries you, rather than go on to publish a letter, confirming its veracity and using it as an opportunity to attack your clients former partner?
Hold on. Are you saying Shahmir's family are not unsafe because of this disclosure?
If they are unsafe, why confirm the claim is true in a letter attacking the former partner? Surely removing the claim (which Cummings promptly complied with) should be your sole goal.
Don't ask me, ask Bindmans.
I'm not asking you about Bindman's belief, I'm asking you about your belief. Do you believe . Shahmir's family are unsafe because of this disclosure? Or not? Or "don't know"?
How could I possibly know?
The fact that Bindmans published a letter confirming the claim, and attacking the former partner with quotes from their client does make me wonder whether 'family member safety in Pakistan' was their top priority.
If you were genuinely concerned about your clients family members safety in Pakistan, surely you’d stop when Cummings removed the statement that worries you, rather than go on to publish a letter, confirming its veracity and using it as an opportunity to attack your clients former partner?
Hold on. Are you saying Shahmir's family are not unsafe because of this disclosure?
If they are unsafe, why confirm the claim is true in a letter attacking the former partner? Surely removing the claim (which Cummings promptly complied with) should be your sole goal.
Don't ask me, ask Bindmans.
I'm not asking you about Bindman's belief, I'm asking you about your belief. Do you believe . Shahmir's family are unsafe because of this disclosure? Or not? Or "don't know"?
How could I possibly know?
The fact that Bindmans published a letter confirming the claim, and attacking the former partner with quotes from their client does make me wonder whether 'family member safety in Pakistan' was their top priority.
The problem with outing somebody is that taking the disclosure down does not unout somebody: the point is not to do it in the first place. Shahmir is now having some difficult conversations with his relatives tonight and his sex life is now the subject of prurient comment worldwide[1], which is not a good place to be. We sometimes forget that politics is made up of living people, and casting doubt on his relatives' reaction is not really helpful.
If you were genuinely concerned about your clients family members safety in Pakistan, surely you’d stop when Cummings removed the statement that worries you, rather than go on to publish a letter, confirming its veracity and using it as an opportunity to attack your clients former partner?
Hold on. Are you saying Shahmir's family are not unsafe because of this disclosure?
If they are unsafe, why confirm the claim is true in a letter attacking the former partner? Surely removing the claim (which Cummings promptly complied with) should be your sole goal.
Don't ask me, ask Bindmans.
I'm not asking you about Bindman's belief, I'm asking you about your belief. Do you believe . Shahmir's family are unsafe because of this disclosure? Or not? Or "don't know"?
How could I possibly know?
The fact that Bindmans published a letter confirming the claim, and attacking the former partner with quotes from their client does make me wonder whether 'family member safety in Pakistan' was their top priority.
The problem with outing somebody is that taking the disclosure down does not unout somebody: the point is not to do it in the first place. Shahmir is now having some difficult conversations with his relatives tonight and his sex life is now the subject of prurient comment worldwide[1], which is not a good place to be. We sometimes forget that politics is made up of living people, and casting doubt on his relatives' reaction is not really helpful.
[1] including this sentence, ironically.
Surely it is naive in the extreme to make claims about someone and expect the fact that you were in a relationship with them for 18 months to remain a secret?
If you were genuinely concerned about your clients family members safety in Pakistan, surely you’d stop when Cummings removed the statement that worries you, rather than go on to publish a letter, confirming its veracity and using it as an opportunity to attack your clients former partner?
Hold on. Are you saying Shahmir's family are not unsafe because of this disclosure?
If they are unsafe, why confirm the claim is true in a letter attacking the former partner? Surely removing the claim (which Cummings promptly complied with) should be your sole goal.
Don't ask me, ask Bindmans.
I'm not asking you about Bindman's belief, I'm asking you about your belief. Do you believe . Shahmir's family are unsafe because of this disclosure? Or not? Or "don't know"?
How could I possibly know?
The fact that Bindmans published a letter confirming the claim, and attacking the former partner with quotes from their client does make me wonder whether 'family member safety in Pakistan' was their top priority.
The problem with outing somebody is that taking the disclosure down does not unout somebody: the point is not to do it in the first place. Shahmir is now having some difficult conversations with his relatives tonight and his sex life is now the subject of prurient comment worldwide[1], which is not a good place to be. We sometimes forget that politics is made up of living people, and casting doubt on his relatives' reaction is not really helpful.
[1] including this sentence, ironically.
Surely it is naive in the extreme to make claims about someone and expect the fact that you were in a relationship with them for 18 months to remain a secret?
Fair point, but the tone of tonight's thread has been depressing. We have JWisemann characterising Israel as a regionally destabilising racist terror state and we're discussing whether a Leave campaigner had sex with Teresa May's secretary during the referendum campaign. Even by PB's standards it's dispiriting.
If you were genuinely concerned about your clients family members safety in Pakistan, surely you’d stop when Cummings removed the statement that worries you, rather than go on to publish a letter, confirming its veracity and using it as an opportunity to attack your clients former partner?
Hold on. Are you saying Shahmir's family are not unsafe because of this disclosure?
If they are unsafe, why confirm the claim is true in a letter attacking the former partner? Surely removing the claim (which Cummings promptly complied with) should be your sole goal.
Don't ask me, ask Bindmans.
I'm not asking you about Bindman's belief, I'm asking you about your belief. Do you believe . Shahmir's family are unsafe because of this disclosure? Or not? Or "don't know"?
How could I possibly know?
The fact that Bindmans published a letter confirming the claim, and attacking the former partner with quotes from their client does make me wonder whether 'family member safety in Pakistan' was their top priority.
The problem with outing somebody is that taking the disclosure down does not unout somebody: the point is not to do it in the first place. Shahmir is now having some difficult conversations with his relatives tonight and his sex life is now the subject of prurient comment worldwide[1], which is not a good place to be. We sometimes forget that politics is made up of living people, and casting doubt on his relatives' reaction is not really helpful.
[1] including this sentence, ironically.
Surely it is naive in the extreme to make claims about someone and expect the fact that you were in a relationship with them for 18 months to remain a secret?
we're discussing whether a Leave campaigner had sex with Teresa May's secretary during the referendum campaign.
I thought we were discussing whether the Leave campaigners' lawyers were as motivated by 'family safety in Pakistan' as they purported to be?
I fear a naive young man has been hung out to dry by his journalist 'friends' and lawyers - who having tied it so forcefully to the Prime Minister have ensured wall to wall coverage - not very 'discrete'....
EDIT - for clarity, Parkinson was not Mrs May's secretary during the referendum campaign - your comment might be misunderstood.
I remember being here for the 2004 US election, at least on election night. Some politics blog must have sent me here for updates. (was going to say twitter, but of course there was a time when twitter didn't exist, strange as it may seem).
I remember the 2008 US presidential as being the first time I bet any significant amount on a political contest, so I can't claim to be an early adopter. Congratulations & best wishes to the great Smithson, nontheless.
The night of the New Hampshire Democratic Primary was one of the greatest (and most profitable) in the history of this site.
which is not to dispute the country's right to exist
Countries don't have a right to exist.
They have a right to not be invaded and "right to exist" sounds like it means that, but it doesn't, and it's not a good idea to play along with this particular rhetorical trick.
which is not to dispute the country's right to exist
Countries don't have a right to exist.
They have a right to not be invaded and "right to exist" sounds like it means that, but it doesn't, and it's not a good idea to play along with this particular rhetorical trick.
There are some very nasty voices on here this evening. Beyond the usual level of 'banter'
I would urge the mods who might still be online to review things and perhaps put a few people on a short time-out until they can moderate their tone and content back to what most of PB users would like to encounter.
Robust debate is one thing - but we aren't getting that tonight. Reason is being ignored and people are showing themselves up.
Totally disagree. We’re all politically engaged adults. It’s important that on a site like this people’s true views are expressed and digested. No sugar-coating.
Why do you think Jezza supported all the EDMs I just posted?
It is very easy to sign up to any number of EDMs - it is very different to actually taking action.
It is his lack of action to tackle anti-semitism since he became leader that is at the root of today's events.
If he really wanted to take a stand - he could have done. Ken Livingstone could have been expelled from Labour. The Chakrabati report could have actually had some teeth and delivered real action.
But no.
Actions are what matter more than EDM signings.
The Chakrabati report was criticised so since then we have adopted a tougher set of rules proposed by the JLM, that doesn't seem to have led to any significant change though. It could be that much like the press frenzy regarding misogyny, just like they did with Bernie, it is much over stated and thus impossible to solve to the presses, or perhaps more accurately those who are opposed, satisfaction.
Also both decisions on Ken Livingstone were taken by people in place before Corbyn become leader.
Of course as part of the press campaign to say, look at all the mud we've thrown therefore there must be a problem, it is a good tactic.
Anybody got any idea when a Labour moderate will actually make a proper bloody stand? By that I mean resign the Whip and to hell with the consequences.
When Corbyn decisively loses a General Election.
Simon Danczuk's dreadful showing in the GE 2017 (admittedly for different reasons) shows what happens when the red rosette drops from your lapel, this could be an interesting test of Labour
I knew Danczuk lost badly, but I hadn't realised how badly until now: outpolled 35-1 by the official Labour Party candidate.
Mind you, he was (and is) a complete cock, so this shouldn't be a total surprise.
Corbyn’s anti semitism is just a dog whistle to harvest the Islamic vote en masse - let’s be honest about this please.
No, it’s not. It’s much more connected to Soviet anti-Semitism.
So gaining the Muslim vote is just an added bonus ?
I think labelling all moslems anti-semitic is not only racist, but also profoundly wrong. For what it’s worth the moslem population of Islington North is relatively low. Corbyn never needed a moslem vote to be elected.
I do think a majority of Muslims are anti Israel that can lead to other things,just look at my constitucy of Bradford west.
First we had George ( Israel free zone) Galloway and then our own anti Semitic or Israel labour MP Shah.
Much of the anti-Jewish feeling within many Muslims (not all) derives from the Koran.
Palestinians might have grounds for disliking Israelis but it does not explain why so many Muslims should so often be anti-Jewish. The roots lie in their religion and culture. And that raises tough questions which those who seek to explain it away by referring to Israel’s policies or existence don’t wish to consider let alone answer.
In fairness to Muslims Jewish people were generally better treated in the Middle East than Europe prior to the founding of Israel. It was when Israel was founded that quite a few Arab states expelled some of their Jewish population and the tensions and wars have increased since.
It also might be a bit annoying for a Muslim to hear that obviously all the Jewish-Islam problem is because of Islam when Europeans used to have a massive problem with anti-semitism, until they helped setup a country outside of Europe for the majority of their Jewish people to move to, where they now look down on those people there for having an anti-semitism problem. Which is to suggest we solved our racism problem not by getting rid of our own racism.
I don't want to get into evil Westerners all at fault territory but taking out the Iranian government, one of the few ME states to recognise Israel and a democratic and quite liberal state (certainly compared to any neighbours) was obviously a backwards step.
Social and economic development (for the population in general) as well as more positive relations with Israel and the West in general are probably the most effective way to change it but I won't be holding my breath on any of those counts for a while.
Anybody got any idea when a Labour moderate will actually make a proper bloody stand? By that I mean resign the Whip and to hell with the consequences.
When Corbyn decisively loses a General Election.
Simon Danczuk's dreadful showing in the GE 2017 (admittedly for different reasons) shows what happens when the red rosette drops from your lapel, this could be an interesting test of Labour
I knew Danczuk lost badly, but I hadn't realised how badly until now: outpolled 35-1 by the official Labour Party candidate.
Mind you, he was (and is) a complete cock, so this shouldn't be a total surprise.
There were other factors with Danczuk but you'd have to be a very popular figure locally to beat the official Labour candidate let alone actually retain your seat. Especially with both parties polling such high numbers I'm not sure if I'd back any of the potential rebels...
Anybody got any idea when a Labour moderate will actually make a proper bloody stand? By that I mean resign the Whip and to hell with the consequences.
When Corbyn decisively loses a General Election.
Simon Danczuk's dreadful showing in the GE 2017 (admittedly for different reasons) shows what happens when the red rosette drops from your lapel, this could be an interesting test of Labour
I knew Danczuk lost badly, but I hadn't realised how badly until now: outpolled 35-1 by the official Labour Party candidate.
Mind you, he was (and is) a complete cock, so this shouldn't be a total surprise.
There were other factors with Danczuk but you'd have to be a very popular figure locally to beat the official Labour candidate let alone actually retain your seat. Especially with both parties polling such high numbers I'm not sure if I'd back any of the potential rebels...
Dick Taverne managed it at a by-election, held it for one election, and the lost at the subsequent.
But he's the exception rather than the rule.
(True story time. I'd just read The March of Unreason by Dick Taverne in - I think - 2006. I was wandering down to my local polling station for the London elections that year, and was staggered to discover that Dick Taverne was standing for the local council in Fitzrovia. Having loved his book, I was obliged to cast a vote his way, not that it helped.)
My daughter (10), has declared herself an LA FC fan. My son (7, soon to be 8), claims that LA FC are newcomers and not a real team, and the only LA team is the Galaxy.
They are both want to go to the LA Galaxy vs LAFC game on Saturday.
Anybody got any idea when a Labour moderate will actually make a proper bloody stand? By that I mean resign the Whip and to hell with the consequences.
When Corbyn decisively loses a General Election.
Simon Danczuk's dreadful showing in the GE 2017 (admittedly for different reasons) shows what happens when the red rosette drops from your lapel, this could be an interesting test of Labour
I knew Danczuk lost badly, but I hadn't realised how badly until now: outpolled 35-1 by the official Labour Party candidate.
Mind you, he was (and is) a complete cock, so this shouldn't be a total surprise.
There were other factors with Danczuk but you'd have to be a very popular figure locally to beat the official Labour candidate let alone actually retain your seat. Especially with both parties polling such high numbers I'm not sure if I'd back any of the potential rebels...
Dick Taverne managed it at a by-election, held it for one election, and the lost at the subsequent.
But he's the exception rather than the rule.
(True story time. I'd just read The March of Unreason by Dick Taverne in - I think - 2006. I was wandering down to my local polling station for the London elections that year, and was staggered to discover that Dick Taverne was standing for the local council in Fitzrovia. Having loved his book, I was obliged to cast a vote his way, not that it helped.)
Peter Law managed it as well in Blaenau Gwent, interesting looking back at his complaints now, all female shortlists were imposed (according to him) when a leadership backed male candidate was unlikely to be picked.
I think the difference then is New Labour weren't necessarily popular at that point, it was almost a free kick at the leaders. Obviously there are always issues and there are issues now but I'd imagine there was a lot more negative feeling towards the Labour leadership in the area at that point. You need an issue where you are seen as being with the people in some way. In Labour areas being anti Corbyn, or a pro EU voice who realistically can't turn the referendum around as an independent (or as part of the Lib Dems), probably isn't enough.
This doesn't rule out some realistic rallying cry that could get people behind them but I can't see something coming up. It could work in terms of allowing another party to win the seat depending on the split and how close other parties are, not many MPs are going to be up for a suicidal charge though.
My daughter (10), has declared herself an LA FC fan. My son (7, soon to be 8), claims that LA FC are newcomers and not a real team, and the only LA team is the Galaxy.
They are both want to go to the LA Galaxy vs LAFC game on Saturday.
How do I manage this?
Generally in a family area*, especially in the case of US soccer**, I wouldn't have thought there would be big objections to a young child supporting the other team whilst their sibling supports the 'right' team.
Though I guess you could check if the stadium/team/company have any kind of problem with it.
Labour figures have criticised Jeremy Corbyn's decision to sack his shadow Northern Ireland secretary for calling for another EU referendum.
Labour peer Peter Hain described the dismissal as a "Stalinist purge".
If Owen Smith was digging nickel in the Siberian mines then that might have had some validity. Actually he has just returned to the backbenches.
How would the Conservative party have reacted if a Cabinet member had advocated a second referendum? Would that be fine and dandy or a sacking as part of a "Stalinist Purge"?
Labour figures have criticised Jeremy Corbyn's decision to sack his shadow Northern Ireland secretary for calling for another EU referendum.
Labour peer Peter Hain described the dismissal as a "Stalinist purge".
If Owen Smith was digging nickel in the Siberian mines then that might have had some validity. Actually he has just returned to the backbenches.
How would the Conservative party have reacted if a Cabinet member had advocated a second referendum? Would that be fine and dandy or a sacking as part of a "Stalinist Purge"?
It’s Peter Hain being Peter Hain. However it does seem along with the reaction to Russian murder that public unity of the labour we saw post GE is gone.
Amazing that Corbynistas have such a problem with far right, extremist foreign powers, given how willing they are to push Kremlin talking points after the first ever chemical attack on British soil.
Trusting Theresa May and the UK’s utterly discredited security establishment about as far as you can throw them is just common sense and does not equal pushing ‘Kremlin talking points’.
CRicket washed out for the day ...same again tomorrow please.
If our national strategy is to pray for rain stops play in every match, would it not be easier simply to give up the game? It would save a fortune in air fares and EdSec could carry on flogging school playing fields to property developers.
Everyone has their blind spots. Hard left Labour figures’ inability to see that their more strident anti-Zionism is often indistinguishable from crude anti-Semitism is one of theirs.
It is noteworthy that it is most vigorously criticised by people who cheerfully lined up behind posters that spread xenophobic lies. They don’t like having their blind spots pointed out either.
Anybody got any idea when a Labour moderate will actually make a proper bloody stand? By that I mean resign the Whip and to hell with the consequences.
When Corbyn decisively loses a General Election.
Simon Danczuk's dreadful showing in the GE 2017 (admittedly for different reasons) shows what happens when the red rosette drops from your lapel, this could be an interesting test of Labour
I knew Danczuk lost badly, but I hadn't realised how badly until now: outpolled 35-1 by the official Labour Party candidate.
Mind you, he was (and is) a complete cock, so this shouldn't be a total surprise.
Complete cock? Another anti-semitic smear. You are Jeremy Corbyn AICMFP.
Will be interesting to see how this evolves - but I don’t think being a gay man of Pakistani heritage can be an automatic “get out of jail free” card when a former partner disputes your claims.
It seems the relationship (and hence the nature of the advice) is a key part of Parkinson’s defence - to try and rule that out of order is aggressive
Comments
Congratulations & best wishes to the great Smithson, nontheless.
Just admit it. You sympathise with anti-Western regimes more than Western governments and will always follow narratives they are peddling.
Of course, all that should be completely irrelevant to anti-semitism - it should be possible (and not anti-semitic) to be very critical of Israeli policy without having an iota of prejudice towards people of Jewish background: that's Corbyn's position and mine and I think a pretty common Labour view. Labour Friends of Israel doesn't have much time for the current government. The reverse is sort of true too - there are far-right evangelical Christians in the US who presuumably believe Jews are misguided about religion but think that Israel's government is terrific.
https://skwawkbox.org/2018/03/23/corbyns-voting-record-shows-mearone-smear-could-not-be-more-misleading/
I would urge the mods who might still be online to review things and perhaps put a few people on a short time-out until they can moderate their tone and content back to what most of PB users would like to encounter.
Robust debate is one thing - but we aren't getting that tonight. Reason is being ignored and people are showing themselves up.
Another favourite of our ruling class, Saudi Arabia, has many similarities.
It is his actions (or lack of them) since becoming leader that is under scrutiny. As you well know.
It is also the company he has chosen to keep throughout his career. It is also the other causes he has chosen to espouse. All of that comes together to paint a very clear picture.
You know this.
We also now know where you stand. And what you stand for.
By your friends ye shall be known.
Or the Tories and Analytica
I am much more interested in why he has failed to challenge the anti-Semitism of the people he has shared platforms with for many years and why so many Jewbaiters on the far left turn out to be his friends.
It is his lack of action to tackle anti-semitism since he became leader that is at the root of today's events.
If he really wanted to take a stand - he could have done. Ken Livingstone could have been expelled from Labour. The Chakrabati report could have actually had some teeth and delivered real action.
But no.
Actions are what matter more than EDM signings.
First we had George ( Israel free zone) Galloway and then our own anti Semitic or Israel labour MP Shah.
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/977339907759681537
Palestinians might have grounds for disliking Israelis but it does not explain why so many Muslims should so often be anti-Jewish. The roots lie in their religion and culture. And that raises tough questions which those who seek to explain it away by referring to Israel’s policies or existence don’t wish to consider let alone answer.
Otherwise, after today's events, they should hang their heads in shame.
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/977181672239136771?s=20
And subsequent removal:
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/977289152826953729?s=20
Will be interesting to see how this evolves - but I don’t think being a gay man of Pakistani heritage can be an automatic “get out of jail free” card when a former partner disputes your claims.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/may-aide-accused-of-outing-former-partner-in-brexit-row-kts2nr888
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5889484/whistle-blower-outed-gay-brexit-referendum/
"In 2016, Shahmir told VL’s director of compliance, who took detailed contemporaneous notes, that VL behaved legally and properly..."
Why was it for Shahmir to tell Vote Leave's director of compliance that Vote Leave had behaved legally and properly?
You are assuming the statements are incompatible. That's not necessarily true (his understanding of what constituted "legal and proper" may have changed in the interim, he may have recalled something he'd forgotten, and so on).
Don't ask me, ask Bindmans.
https://dominiccummings.com
The fact that Bindmans published a letter confirming the claim, and attacking the former partner with quotes from their client does make me wonder whether 'family member safety in Pakistan' was their top priority.
[1] including this sentence, ironically.
I fear a naive young man has been hung out to dry by his journalist 'friends' and lawyers - who having tied it so forcefully to the Prime Minister have ensured wall to wall coverage - not very 'discrete'....
EDIT - for clarity, Parkinson was not Mrs May's secretary during the referendum campaign - your comment might be misunderstood.
They have a right to not be invaded and "right to exist" sounds like it means that, but it doesn't, and it's not a good idea to play along with this particular rhetorical trick.
Also both decisions on Ken Livingstone were taken by people in place before Corbyn become leader.
Of course as part of the press campaign to say, look at all the mud we've thrown therefore there must be a problem, it is a good tactic.
Edit: Congratulations on the 14 years!
Mind you, he was (and is) a complete cock, so this shouldn't be a total surprise.
It also might be a bit annoying for a Muslim to hear that obviously all the Jewish-Islam problem is because of Islam when Europeans used to have a massive problem with anti-semitism, until they helped setup a country outside of Europe for the majority of their Jewish people to move to, where they now look down on those people there for having an anti-semitism problem. Which is to suggest we solved our racism problem not by getting rid of our own racism.
I don't want to get into evil Westerners all at fault territory but taking out the Iranian government, one of the few ME states to recognise Israel and a democratic and quite liberal state (certainly compared to any neighbours) was obviously a backwards step.
Social and economic development (for the population in general) as well as more positive relations with Israel and the West in general are probably the most effective way to change it but I won't be holding my breath on any of those counts for a while.
But he's the exception rather than the rule.
(True story time. I'd just read The March of Unreason by Dick Taverne in - I think - 2006. I was wandering down to my local polling station for the London elections that year, and was staggered to discover that Dick Taverne was standing for the local council in Fitzrovia. Having loved his book, I was obliged to cast a vote his way, not that it helped.)
L'Entente: the Parisian restaurant that only serves British food - and the French are going nuts for it
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/food-and-drink/restaurants/lentente-parisian-restaurant-serves-british-food-french-going/
http://news.sky.com/story/hero-officer-dies-after-french-siege-11302226
My daughter (10), has declared herself an LA FC fan.
My son (7, soon to be 8), claims that LA FC are newcomers and not a real team, and the only LA team is the Galaxy.
They are both want to go to the LA Galaxy vs LAFC game on Saturday.
How do I manage this?
I think the difference then is New Labour weren't necessarily popular at that point, it was almost a free kick at the leaders. Obviously there are always issues and there are issues now but I'd imagine there was a lot more negative feeling towards the Labour leadership in the area at that point. You need an issue where you are seen as being with the people in some way. In Labour areas being anti Corbyn, or a pro EU voice who realistically can't turn the referendum around as an independent (or as part of the Lib Dems), probably isn't enough.
This doesn't rule out some realistic rallying cry that could get people behind them but I can't see something coming up. It could work in terms of allowing another party to win the seat depending on the split and how close other parties are, not many MPs are going to be up for a suicidal charge though.
Edit: Cool story.
Though I guess you could check if the stadium/team/company have any kind of problem with it.
*I assume they have a family stand or section.
**I'm guessing its soccer.
Labour peer Peter Hain described the dismissal as a "Stalinist purge".
How would the Conservative party have reacted if a Cabinet member had advocated a second referendum? Would that be fine and dandy or a sacking as part of a "Stalinist Purge"?
It is noteworthy that it is most vigorously criticised by people who cheerfully lined up behind posters that spread xenophobic lies. They don’t like having their blind spots pointed out either.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/0/2193733
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43525267
https://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21739166-she-matches-president-many-ways-and-trumps-him-some-why-stormy-daniels-so?fsrc=scn/fb/te/bl/ed/whystormydanielsissodangerousthepornstarandthepresident